View Full Version : A new War arising!
domagoj
26 May 2009, 22:19
North Korea has been threatening for some weeks to restart its nuclear programme and build up its arsenal of nuclear weapons.
Pyongyang was enraged when the UN Security Council condemned its long-range rocket launch in April and tightened existing sanctions.
The North insisted it had put a communications satellite into orbit, but many governments saw the launch as a thinly disguised test of Taepodong-2 long-range missile technology, aimed at putting parts of the US within North Korea's reach.
North Korea is forbidden from pursuing this kind of technology by a UN resolution passed in 2006.
In response to the UN criticism, Pyongyang kicked out all international nuclear monitors and quit the long-running six-nation disarmament talks aimed at convincing it to give up its nuclear programme in exchange for aid.
North Korea appears to have moved from a posture of negotiation to confrontation - directly challenging the US and South Korean administrations' policies.
Despite promising a fresh start to bilateral relations, US President Barack Obama, who denounced last month's missile launch as "a provocation", has so far failed to persuade the North Koreans to re-enter negotiations.
In a statement carried by state media, North Korea's foreign ministry said: "There is nothing to be gained by sitting down together with a party that continues to view us with hostility."
Inter-Korean relations have also become fraught since South Korean President Lee Myung-bak took office last February.
The conservative leader insisted there would be no further unconditional economic aid for the North, and that any concessions depended on the North's co-operation on denuclearisation.
Analysts suggest that North Korea is adopting a belligerent attitude to force both the US and South Korea to offer greater economic and diplomatic concessions in return for nuclear disarmament.
I feel another war vying for a reason to start.
Atleast China,Russia,South Korea,Japan,Usa are gonna be involved.
ANOTHER WORLD WAR?!
North Korea has been threatening for some weeks to restart its nuclear programme and build up its arsenal of nuclear weapons.
Pyongyang was enraged when the UN Security Council condemned its long-range rocket launch in April and tightened existing sanctions.
The North insisted it had put a communications satellite into orbit, but many governments saw the launch as a thinly disguised test of Taepodong-2 long-range missile technology, aimed at putting parts of the US within North Korea's reach.
North Korea is forbidden from pursuing this kind of technology by a UN resolution passed in 2006.
In response to the UN criticism, Pyongyang kicked out all international nuclear monitors and quit the long-running six-nation disarmament talks aimed at convincing it to give up its nuclear programme in exchange for aid.
North Korea appears to have moved from a posture of negotiation to confrontation - directly challenging the US and South Korean administrations' policies.
Despite promising a fresh start to bilateral relations, US President Barack Obama, who denounced last month's missile launch as "a provocation", has so far failed to persuade the North Koreans to re-enter negotiations.
In a statement carried by state media, North Korea's foreign ministry said: "There is nothing to be gained by sitting down together with a party that continues to view us with hostility."
Inter-Korean relations have also become fraught since South Korean President Lee Myung-bak took office last February.
The conservative leader insisted there would be no further unconditional economic aid for the North, and that any concessions depended on the North's co-operation on denuclearisation.
Analysts suggest that North Korea is adopting a belligerent attitude to force both the US and South Korea to offer greater economic and diplomatic concessions in return for nuclear disarmament.
I feel another war vying for a reason to start.
Atleast China,Russia,South Korea,Japan,Usa are gonna be involved.
ANOTHER WORLD WAR?!
As far as the war is far away from EU, and mostly Bulgaria, I don't care....
They're bullying the world into giving them more humanitarian aid. Again and again. Bacause it works.
domagoj
26 May 2009, 23:11
Yep but nuclear shootout would affect us all...
Bulgaroktonos
26 May 2009, 23:48
100 or 200 years ago the western world would have send tanks or canon ships to destroy the enemy and his weapons. Today politicinas talking and tell us they are greatly perturbed. What a joke !
Honestly, I think the "tanks and canon ships" is both a more effective and more humanitarian approach, but no one has the guts for it anymore. True, war indeed brings *great* suffering to the people, but IMO a bad peace brings even more. Then again, I doubt anything serious will happen, since:
A) The Western world is far too hesitant, "diplomatic" and basically weak (yes, I even include the "warmongering Americans" here and I don't even want to mention the useless EU)
B) North Korea will not gain anything from a blown-out war with anyone at this moment. The only thing China could win is taking over North Korea in a "pacifying mission" (direct confrontation with the West is utterly useless for them, since they'd simply go bankrupt). As for Russia - they're the only pretty unpredictable factor, although if they do get involved in such a scenario, it would be simply for "minor" economical gains. Oh, yes, and Japan - I guess they'll invade with tentacle-wielding robot-schoolgirls. ;)
C) None of those countries is ready for a World War (and they all know pretty well that they're not ready for a nuclear war and will never be). As maks said, it's all just a "negotiation" about who gives more and who receives more - the money rule the world of politics. The most violent it could become would be a short border skirmish, which would basically decrease the "bargaining price" of the aggressor greatly.
D) There's no oil in Korea (I think). :p
Mathyas Rex
27 May 2009, 21:01
Personally, I really don't give a sh*t if they nuke each other, just keep it away from Europe.
Maybe it would be profitable for Europe it they (US, NK etc.) would destroy each other's countries, then our continent would regain it's leading role in the world. This situation would be similar to WW1 and WW2, where Europe was the loozer.
But I doubt anything serious will happen, because in this century the only real conflicts were caused by rebels.
Last note: If a global war will break out, I'm joining the russians, so I'd be on the winning(surviving?) side :D
Bulgaroktonos
27 May 2009, 21:57
Mathyas Rex : You'd be wiped out by the mighty EU and it's giant military forces :D :D
When I become byzantine Emperor no asiatic or american people shall abuse the old and educated, sophisticated continent of Europe ! Stand fast Greeks, stand fast Romans !
:D :D :D :D :D :D
domagoj
27 May 2009, 22:20
OFFTOPIC*Romans are extinct.
What you gonna do with Croatia*OFFTOPIC*
ONTOPIC
You cant talk about nukes that way!Its like you care only for your asses!
Remember WW2?We were saved by Out-of-Europe countries!
Also,Nobody wants a Černobil like area!
I have been to Černobil and when the sun shines it burns you like if you have poured many bags of salt to an open wound!
Bulgaroktonos
27 May 2009, 23:03
OFFTOPPIC Croatians who downloaded my mod are spared /OFFTOPPIC
Hm I'm german we weren't really saved anyway ...
Why should X-rays influence the sun ? And why the hell you have been to Cernobil ? You got probably ill !
I'm Bulgarian... Hmm, we definitely haven't been saved either. :p
Bulgaroktonos
27 May 2009, 23:34
Wasn't Bulgaria occupied by the Germans ?
domagoj
27 May 2009, 23:46
I didnt get ill.But its the radiation combined by the lack of O-zone in that area.
Alos you were saved if USA wouldn get involved we wouldp robably be speaking German now in the forums.
Bulgaroktonos
28 May 2009, 00:29
Yes that would be the main problem if the germans won. Oh mein Gott, wir würden alle Deutsch sprechen. Wer dachte, die schlussendliche Ausrottung der Juden oder Versklavung der Slawen wären DAS Kathastrophenszenario liegt völlig falsch ! Die wirkliche Apokalypse wäre das Sprechen/Schreiben der deutschen Sprache in diesem Forum. God bless America for saving us from this evil !
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
Mephistopheles
28 May 2009, 00:39
Truth is, if it hadn't been for the carpet bombing in germany you'd propably not be writing any language at all - if the nazi's had gotten to fulfill their plans of enslaving eastern europe and depriving its inhabitants of education.
I don't think North Korea is aiming for a military confrontation and all involved parties know that. However I view the distribution of nuclear technology to other countries from North Korea as a very important threat.
Wasn't Bulgaria occupied by the Germans ?
Uh, no. We were allied with Germany, in both World Wars. Though in the second one we got occupied by the Russians and they liked it so much that they stayed for another 45 years. And everyone can see the differences now (note that pre-War Bulgaria was the most advanced country in the region, then communism came, saw and left in what we are today).
Yes that would be the main problem if the germans won. Oh mein Gott, wir würden alle Deutsch sprechen.
Yeah, I'm actually rather thankful to the Allies for that. My German classes in high school were definitely the most terrifying subject for almost everyone in our class (though that was mostly because of our teacher, die sogenante "Fuehrerlehrerin"). Then again, if the Germans had won, Bulgaria would have been united and we'd have no communism. :rolleyes:
domagoj
28 May 2009, 09:02
*OFFTOPIC*If Germany would have won i would have this.
http://hrvatska.friendpages.com/photos/52/348952.main.jpg
But Hitler was a one-baller and he had to attack Russia.
Stupid wannabe ninja.*OFFTOPIC*
ONTOPIC
I think that Korea will soon unify because,well,just because all those people are fucking tired of their ass licking leader(Either lick the West or the East).
And i think that again Russia and USA are having a Cold War.
This time about the missile shield and Korea.
Russia supports north,while USA South.
Mathyas Rex
29 May 2009, 21:33
We were saved by Out-of-Europe countries!
OFF-TOPIC
Hungary got screwed twice in those wars, after being forced to participate in both of them. It had to suport the 'liberating' destruction of the country (just check on the siege of Budapest) during the wars, and face humiliation at the peace 'treaties' ( 1000 year old country torn to peaces). The aftermath was as bad too, famine (which never ocured, not even in medieval perios), poverty, comunism etc.
So you should think twice before posting!!!!!!
Personally, I don't feel saved at all.
Hmm...
What do you guys think about the new crisis in Iran? Will it change the political stalemate in the region significantly?
Bulgaroktonos
22 Jun 2009, 18:33
no way. The demonstrants on the streets shout "Allahu Akbar" :bash: :bash: :bash:
Replace a extreme religious regime with a extreme religious democracy ? Seems pointless.
You know me and you know how much I am against rough statements, but I can't help myself.... I apologise, Bulgaroktonos, because I respect you.... but anyway...no way. The demonstrants on the streets shout "Allahu Akbar" :bash: :bash: :bash:
Replace a extreme religious regime with a extreme religious democracy ? Seems pointless.
this is bullshit!
Those people risk their lives for more democracy and freedom! And you condemn them just because they haven't lost their faith. And all this only because you are completely ignorant to their faith and to the world they live in.
If the demonstrations will achieve their goal, it might make Iran more liberal and democratic, but it won't change the principles and the system of government. This is not anti-Islamic revolution and you should not expect anything like this.
The regime is very religious.. but it combines principles of democracy and religious conservativism better than any other system in the world. The increasing strength of "Civil society" (which resluts in theese demonstrations) is very promising for the entire world of Islam. The society is slowly becoming more and more democratic - it is not question of years, it is question of generations. From this perspective the "green movement in Iran" is - IMO - better than "forced secular /kemalist democracy" in Turkey.
The massiveness of protests is very promissing. I hope Iran will find its own way to democracy.
Bulgaroktonos
22 Jun 2009, 19:15
At first - I have great respect for all these young iranians who risk their lives out there and really want to change something. I also agree that a people's revolution is far better than a revolution 'from the top' . I just think the demonstrants won't change anything ... I'm a little bit pessimistic. :)
The french revolution was anti-religious and led Europe to it's greatest periode of power. IMO religion and progress are opponents.
The french revolution was anti-religious and led Europe to it's greatest periode of power. IMO religion and progress are opponents.
it would be for great discussion and I don't want to hijack this thread. Anyway, I disagree that religion is opponent of progress. Religion keeps traditions. Total refusal of traditions leads - sooner or later - to regressive movements. You can see it in Turkey.
Iran is seeking its own way - seeking democracy within its own religious tradition. This "revolution" is a proof that the way is not bad. "Democaratization" is question of generations. Western societies have "reforming period" of 20 years 1789-1804/1830/1848/1866-71/...1900's/1945-8/1968/1989/...
Iran has 25-30 years (1925/1955/1979/2009?) it is not that bad - if you look at "good-because-secular" Turkey, there is nothing like that - or it is usualy replaced by military coup d'état - and as a result the society is polarizing in euro-secular (which is contitually being weakened by Europe's refusal) against traditionalist (islamic)...
Hm I'm german we weren't really saved anyway ...
What's worse?
To lose a war, or to live under totalitarian regime?
I'm Czech, we "won" the war.. to be enslaved by communist totality.
Bulgaroktonos
22 Jun 2009, 20:10
Modern turkey has already had it's greatest revolution - they are on a level iran has still to reach. One year ago I was in Turkey (ok I was in Constantinople but other parts of Turkey will follow the modern ways of this big city) and it is much more modern than some parts of Europe (Irland etc.) At night you can see there drunken girls dancing with strangers ! Show me a place in Iran where this could happen.
Although I agree that religious traditions are important. But we all know that in Iran things are a little bit exaggerated ...
I stop posting now because Empire : Total War patch 1.3 is ready ! cheers !
Bulgaroktonos
22 Jun 2009, 20:14
If you lose a war there's a decent probability to get killed... The whole family of my grandmother was killed (I think about 20 people) It's hard to be a slave but still you are alive.
I have to admit that there's a equal probability to get killed by the totalitarian regime ... Lol
(ok I was in Constantinople but other parts of Turkey will follow the modern ways of this big city) and it is much more modern than some parts of Europe (Irland etc.) At night you can see there drunken girls dancing with strangers ! Show me a place in Iran where this could happen.this is really the thing that shows the better side of modernity that is worth to be followed. Were you actually joking, weren't you?
Although I agree that religious traditions are important. But we all know that in Iran things are a little bit exaggerated ...Please tell me, what do you know about Iran and its system?
If you lose a war there's a decent probability to get killed... The whole family of my grandmother was killed (I think about 20 people) It's hard to be a slave but still you are alive.If you live at war, there's decent probability to get killed. Or do you think that people die only on the side that loses in the end?
And do you think life in victorious Germany under the Nazis would be better than life in defeated Germany? Thousands of people - Germans - were killed in Germany even before the war has started... and they would even if Germany would have won.
Bulgaroktonos
23 Jun 2009, 00:56
Ok maybe this is the opposite extreme. But look, better that than a burka and submission.
The iranian system : hm, I read the wikipedia article and I had a look at this :
http://www.pi-news.net/wp/uploads/2008/03/iran-haengen_440.jpg
On picture says more than thousand words ...
No I really don't think live would be better
This leads nowhere.
Our media inform us about death sencences based on medieval religious law applied in some god-forgotten villages of muslim countries. Islamist media inform normal muslims about insane Western students who shoot at their innocent classmates and teachers, or about Fritzels and beasts like him. Everyone on the "own" side knows how exceptional and beasty those things are, but those on the other are made to believe it is normal. It is part of reality, but much more marginal than the "the others' media" are painting it.
Political rights of Iran cannot be compared to rights in Western democracies. In Iran people can't be anti-religious on public, in France or Turkey they can't be religious. In France they get financial penalty, in Turkey may even be jailed, in Iran they can exceptionaly be even sentenced to death.
I don't say there is no difference. Being zionist in Iran is as much of a crime as it is to be neo-Nazi in Germany. It is a big problem and it is why I hope the people in streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities will achieve something. But you condemned them just because they didn't trow away their traditions. That's unfair.
The regime is still very strong, but the young population of Iran, which is almost 1/2 or all Iranians, has its power aswell, and they have sympathisants even among the ayatollahs. Iran needs change, the people on the street demand it.
Our media inform us about death sencences based on medieval religious law applied in some god-forgotten villages of muslim countries. Islamist media inform normal muslims about insane Western students who shoot at their innocent classmates and teachers, or about Fritzels and beasts like him. Everyone on the "own" side knows how exceptional and beasty those things are, but those on the other are made to believe it is normal. It is part of reality, but much more marginal than the "the others' media" are painting it.
Yes, but the Western medias also shows the Fritzels and school-shootings as beastly and unthinkable horrific tragedies and they get far more coverage in the Western world than some "hangings in some God-forgotten country". So, the question then is: Do the Islamist medias also point out their own bad cases or they persistently show only the Western ones? I'm asking you, since you've travelled around some Islamist countries and should know yourself.
Bulgaroktonos
23 Jun 2009, 10:54
You won't compare islamistic medias with western ones, will you ? This is laughable.
Yes, but the Western medias also shows the Fritzels and school-shootings as beastly and unthinkable horrific tragedies and they get far more coverage in the Western world than some "hangings in some God-forgotten country". So, the question then is: Do the Islamist medias also point out their own bad cases or they persistently show only the Western ones? I'm asking you, since you've travelled around some Islamist countries and should know yourself.
There are various media. Generally, media in muslim world are much more pro-governmental than Western media. Even al-Jazeera is rather bad source of information about Qatar. And then, there is special category of Islamist media (media, controlled by islamists such as Hamas and alike). Those are extremely radical and these certainly don't inform about stoning an unfaithful wife as a beasty crime. I have never watched any official Iranian TV, so I can't say. But I can say that those beasty crimes are often brought to the West through al-Jazeera, al-Arabiyya or other good media. And you can be sure they wouldn|t take them if they wouldn't use a material which is not shocking for them. Anyway, due to different level of civic society in muslim world, those media are more political than the Western ones.
If you compare Hamases al-Quds TV with BBC, you'd be shocked, but if you compare the best muslim media with the best Western, it's not bad. Many people, even in the West, even those who are not really interested in Middle Eastern problems, say that al-Jazeera is better than CNN or even BBC.
Nevertheless, I have only watched few Palestinian TVs and al-Jazeera and Arabiyya. I have personaly never seen any such case there, also because Palestinisan society is very secularized and their own islamists deal with political issues of Palestinian independency rather than social islamism.
Generally, from what I heard, the level of local or governmental media is lower than the Western, by our standarts.
You won't compare islamistic medias with western ones, will you ? This is laughable.
If you don't compare 2 different things, you will never solve possible conflict between them. Your behaviour towards muslims and world of islam is the same as was behaviour of muslim scholars 800 years ago! They ignored whole civilization on their border just because they found it uncivilized and not worth a look. Guess when the fall of Islam has started? Even those uncivilized barbarians can invent something new. Your disrespect has rational reaso (they are not as developed as we are at this point of history), but is a way to hell. Keep your eyes open.
Bulgaroktonos
23 Jun 2009, 18:05
My eyes are open wide in shock. I see the near end of traditional Europe and asking myself if our new society will be better. From what I've seen it isn't. It's also sad that our 2000years old culture will dissapear within a few years.
Cultures don't disappear. They change (Byzantium is a good example). ;)
Bulgaroktonos
23 Jun 2009, 22:24
Hm, don't know if you recognized but the culture and religion of Byzantium disappeared nearly torally (beside of some ruins and threated minorities.) Or will you really tell me that islamic sultans and byzantine caesars are the same ? A culture IMO is clear defined. Where a culture comes to an end a new culture rises.
I meant the transition between late Rome and early Byzantium, though the culture of late Byzantium remained (changed) among the Rum-milet in what is now Greece or even Bulgaria, Serbia, Armenia etc. Of course, as I said, in a changed form, since culture, just like language, tends to change quite a lot over time, be it from foreign pressure or from internal reasons.
The West today is something completely different than 50 years ago... and yes, Byzantine culture is one of the greatest examples, Roman culture in general.
Caesarian Rome was not the same as Justinianian Rome.. and Macedonian, Komnenid and even Paleologid Rome was something completely different. Though it still was Roman/Byzantine culture and it more or less remained (in various vesions) untill today.
Culture that cannot adapt to social changes is a dead culture. And such a culture has no future anyway.
If Europe wants to survive it must learn from its neighbours, otherwise it would end up as isolated island of "old times". If you want to become European Ibn Taymiya, you can dream about glory of the past, ignoring challenges of today. People should learn from others' mistakes. Islam did this mistake, I hope Europe won't... we're still close to th epak of our civilization, don't let it fall.
Bulgaroktonos
24 Jun 2009, 11:14
If you want to become European Ibn Taymiya
?
Mephistopheles
24 Jun 2009, 11:55
Why don't you read up on Ibn Taymiya (alternative spelling more prominent in german transcriptions: "Taimiyya") so you can learn from the mistakes of the past?
?
?
wikipedia?
anyway, in brief: He was a muslim scholar from 13th century.
In his time period, the Mongols arrived to the Middle East and devastated large parts of it.
Contemporary muslims couldn't understand, how those nomadic tribes could smash so many cities of such a great civilization Islam was back then.
And it was Ibn Taymiyya (Iaimiyya), who "established" commonly accepted explanation, that it was a punnishment of God,
which came due to "bid'a" - apostasy of muslims from teachings of the Koran and the first muslims.
That means (he thought that) the God punnished muslims for things that were reasons of the Gold age of Islam from late 8th to 10th century
- absorbation of knowledge of great civilizations such as Roman/Greek, Persian and Indian into the culture of Islam.
Ibn Taymiyya refused this Golden age as a time of decline and asked the Muslims to go back to the roots of Islam - the Koran and the sunna (muslim tradition).
As an effect, the muslims stopped to absorb ideas of the outer world, because they thought they civilization was too great to learn from the barbarians outside.
His theory was later a base for "salafiyya" a movement which is ifeologic source of all regressive muslim schools such as Wahhabism (in Saudi Arabia),
or strict application of the shariya (muslim religious law) which could be seen in Afghanistan under the Taliban etc.
We all can see, what was the result of this ideology - steep decline of once great muslim civilization into one of the most regressive and enclosed cultures.
When I read your words I feel like reading Ibn Taymiyya - our civilization is the greatest, everyone should follow the exact way we went
and it is unacceptable to absorb other cultures into the once so great our culture, based on some ideas.
The world is very organic and it is permanently changing and the worst thing you can do is to ignore all the ways of adaptation to the changes (except your own way, which is based on something, which was once great, but can pretty much be useless few centuries later).
IN the past 150 years the muslims were seeking a way how to become competitive with the West and generally they used 3 ways:
- preplacement of 1400 years of cultural tradition by western ideologies (such as nationalism, secularism, socialism, communism etc.), often total refusal of the tradition. This way was used strictly in Turkey, partly in Egypt, Syria and Iraq or Pakistan. Generally, the only way to push this way is a military dictatorship or authoritative regime which denies democratic competition to wide opposition (traditionalists, democrats, supporters of other western doctrines). This hypocritic forced "westernization" grants "western rights" only to small group of people. The oposition then often takes religious coverage (to get financial support from Saudi Arabia). Due to lack of democratic competition and corruption of the regimes the opposition often turns into terroristic organizations such as Muslim brotherhood or Hamas
- refusal of all Western and non-Muslim (Salafiya, neo-salafiya, wahhabism), except weapons and money, of course - Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Talibani Afghanistan etc. Well, we all know where this leads
- combination of Western ideologies and local tradition. There is a wide scale from very "traditional" Iran to more "pro-western" Morocco. WHat makes it different from both groups above (apart from level of "westernization" or "traditionalism") is that the governments officially don't proclaim the other way as something principially inacceptable or simply "too bad to use it".
Why don't you read up on Ibn Taymiya (alternative spelling more prominent in german transcriptions: "Taimiyya") so you can learn from the mistakes of the past?
Meph, you're still here? ;)
Elvain:
Well, I don't know, since MY civilisation, the one that IS listed as the 3rd in your list, is now regressing...
When we reached our independence, our leaders almost IMMEDIATELY began to complete the westernisation (Soekarno), but was coup d'etat by a military officer, who began to make his kin the lord of the land (really! It was feudalism - with great personality power, no less- in the modern age!), and Javan traditions was ressurected under his orders (It's true that most of the populations are Javans, but still...)
The combined power of modernism and tradisionalism took him down in 1998 (when there was a financial crisis in Asia), and now...
I won't tell you much, just search around the web for Indonesia... We're shortlisted for the MOST CORRUPTED country of the WORLD!
Mephistopheles
25 Jun 2009, 17:04
Yes, I still read the forum daily.
I have my own relation to Indonesia and I think it's one of the most modern islamic dominated countries. There's a lot to repair and the democratic culture of Indonesia is still very young, but it's on the best track - all things considered.
Regarding the islamic world western media is really rather shameful. By just reading the news you'd get the impression of all muslims forming a homogenous movement whereas individualism is a property reserved to our western civilization. On the contrary I think the western world is more uniform, conformed and "alienophobic" than the islamic world.
How would you define Western world? Because f.e. Western Europe and Eastern Europe are even less uniform and conformed (i.e. similar) than WE and America (which is also part of the Western world).
Bulgaroktonos
25 Jun 2009, 22:27
IMO Europe has the best press worldwide.
Richard
25 Jun 2009, 22:52
IMO Europe has the best press worldwide.
http://images.zaazu.com/img/scratch-head03-idea-animated-animation-smiley-emoticon-000416-design.gif
Mephistopheles
25 Jun 2009, 23:22
@NikeBG:
Actually eastern and western european, as well as north american culture are very similar. While in detail there are differences, we mostly share opinions about individuality, the role of humanity on earth, the position of the individual or different sorts of individuals within the nation or society and similarly "basic" things that we don't even think about anymore.
Such basic topics are however very much up for discussion in other cultures and there definitely isn't a perfect answer as of yet, even if we may think we found it.
@Bulgaroktonos:
What do you base your opinion on? I wouldn't consider the Daily Mail, Stern or La Repubblica examples of exceptionally independent media, even though they are very influential in thir respective countries.
Bulgaroktonos
25 Jun 2009, 23:30
I think they are most liberal and offer several oppinions to the reader.