Edward Snowden, Hero or Traitor?

[Brenus]

“in the north an insult to one's mother is brushed off, in the south it's taken so seriously it causes intergenerational vendettas”: Err, you probably don’t understand the local language in the south. Ask our Serbian Friend what is the favourite insult/swearing in Serbian and its translation, and you might have a surprise… Of course he can't as it would cost him a "notification" for bad language.

“europeans are not all the same” nor the USAnians as a French who travelled long time ago from Las Vegas to Salt Lake City can witness. They speak the same language, true…

“we have spent the last thousand years waging wars to prevent that”. This can be said for almost all European Countries. England is probably the last country falling entirely to the yoke of a foreign ruler (William), nearly lost it identity.
The last battle (against Foreigners others than the Scott) on English soil is 1217 (battle of Lincoln), but you had a (small) French Army in Ireland in 1798. I do not count small raids on the coast, nor the incursion of the Dutch Fleet in London.
Then the Royal family is from German Origin, whose Coat of Arm is written in French with French Symbols.

[Greyblades]

“in the north an insult to one's mother is brushed off, in the south it's taken so seriously it causes intergenerational vendettas”: Err, you probably don’t understand the local language in the south. Ask our Serbian Friend what is the favourite insult/swearing in Serbian and its translation, and you might have a surprise… Of course he can't as it would cost him a "notification" for bad language.

When I said south I mean spain and Italy, not the balkans.

“europeans are not all the same” nor the USAnians as a French who travelled long time ago from Las Vegas to Salt Lake City can witness. They speak the same language, true…

What's your point?

“we have spent the last thousand years waging wars to prevent that”. This can be said for almost all European Countries. England is probably the last country falling entirely to the yoke of a foreign ruler (William), nearly lost it identity.

Debatable, considering we actually asked william to invade and most of us supported his "invasion". Also we didnt lose our identity, not even close.

The last battle (against Foreigners others than the Scott) on English soil is 1217 (battle of Lincoln), but you had a (small) French Army in Ireland in 1798. I do not count small raids on the coast, nor the incursion of the Dutch Fleet in London.

And again, your point? All that seems to point out is that we were so successful we didnt get a foriegn enemy on our soil for 800 years, we fought off enemy invaders before they made land almost every time someone tried.

Then the Royal family is from German Origin, whose Coat of Arm is written in French with French Symbols.

We changed from scottish/english kings to scottish/english/german kings... and? Different Kings, same parliament, same country. Again, what exactly is your point here?

[Greyblades]

Ok then, I see his/your point as you have said it, so what is your argument?

[Greyblades]

Yup. It's also prevelant, quite hard to shift, and arguable that it needs addressing.

[Greyblades]

I'm sure the Indians thought the same before the British showed up.

But the indians had no nukes. The days of conquest are done, we are in the age of stalemates now, any threat that looms becomes moot with a mention of Mutually Assured Destruction, and failing that one call to America. Today we are by defintion untouchable, the only viable threats we face is from eachother and until that changes we have the luxury of going on as we allways have been.

A united Europe might come one day, but we dont have any imperative to rush it.

[Kadagar_AV]

His point is that all European countries have these intricate nationalistic histories that just so happen to be totally inter-dependent with other supposedly intricate nationalistic histories. All the little pieces hold the whole concept together.

All of these European "states" had the same idea of what constituted a "Barbarian" or the "Other." Once again, the Indian subcontinent is a good cultural comparison. Tons of languages, identities, and conflicting views of the past. Lots of regional "nationalism" that goes back hundreds of years. I would say, in many cases, that the differences they overcame were much deeper than the ones Europeans are still trying to overcome.

When?

No really, when did India overcome their differences? The last place I was to in India, 2 years ago, had quite clear social distinctions between Marathi speakers and the "others".

There are more than 30 languages spoken by people measured in the millions, and the nation does not have an official language.

So, when you say they overcame their differences, I just very mildly question "In what regards?"

The different cultural groups speak different languages and opt for different positions in the society's hierarchy, is what I understood from my visit. I am quite flabbergasted to understand you have such a different viewpoint!

[Kadagar_AV]

They overcame them by submitting to one government. That's the reality that they acknowledge, while still enjoying their petty differences when they can. To be fair, they only got to this point because of brutal imperialism, but hey... what does that suggest about the future of Europe?

Overcome = submitting?

The historian in me revolts...

There is a rather big gap between a culture overcoming something and submitting to something. I agree with you that they are submitted though, just like Yugoslavia.

But see, Yugoslavia was submitted. I stress to add that they in no way had overcome their cultural grievances though.

[Kadagar_AV]

I'm not saying the grievances ever will be reasonably overcome. The human condition lends itself to creating differences, not bridging them--observe how different parts of the USA become more and more distinct over time.

What I am saying is that the differences between European nations are so small that when you are talking about a global world, its just silly. Hardly a one of Europe's nations can afford to truly stand alone, and it has been like that for a very long time.

I was writing a refusal but thought twice.

Again, I very much go against your idea of "Europe". But the same argument for the western white world holds true.

The idea of "Europeans" just doesn't stick with me. In a global world compared to Europe, there are still racial and cultural ties FAR more important than some "European allegiance".

Honestly speaking, I think that the "Europe" you talk of would rather spend their money helping Japan deal with an earthquake than they would helping the European Nation of Turkey if they were hit by an earthquake.

Not because Japan is more European than Turkey, but because Japan more closely adhere to the "European" culture you talk about.

So I agree and disagree. I agree with your meaning, it's the specifics I question.

[Kadagar_AV]

Yeah... You'r not allowed to be a racist unless you get a dog. *side topic - just started*

[Greyblades]

Right, A united Europe might come one day, and it probably should, but we can take our time doing it.

I can only imagine the amount of crap we'd have to deal with if we were to forced to implement a united europe under what we currently have.

[Ironside]

You could absolutely replace my usage of Europe with white western world. I avoid doing that because I don't want to be confused for a racist.

Do the latinos count into that?