Never heard the Kissinger connection.  And I do love the Avalon hill games as well (except keeping up with all those pieces).  I actually found someone who loved them as well when I was in high school.  We played one game for weeks (a couple hours a day, a couple days a week).

Genocide still is a way of life.

When the Romans murdered the Carthaginians they got away with it (and the international community at the time accepted it) and when the Sudanese government murders the Darfurians they get away with it too.

The world hasn't changed.

Really? Last time I checked, a black people still got a shitload of trouble 50 years ago

Chinese citizen got their citizenship refused to them. Japanese citizen got locked up internment camps.

Right now, Arizona just created laws to discriminate against hispanic people on their territory.

You might claim these actions are justified or not. They might be, or might not. But discrimination still exist in your nation.

(But I will give it to you that you are doing a better job, overall, to help the newcomers to your country than Europe. But then again, Europe's lack of supranational sentiment isn't rooted in their incapacity to integrate immigrants, but just by basic nationalism rooted into centuries of history)

Let's be specific here, this was not a law to discriminate against Hispanics but to enforce illegal immigrant laws. If the police abuse this policy then they should be punished accordingly. This comment comes from a Hispanic man who believes illegals should be treated as criminals since it's a law they are breaking. I went to jail because I drove a can with a suspended license. Was I a danger to the public? I could have hurt someone with a valid license yet I was punished for simply having a suspended license. Actually it was because I didn't go to court for the ticket that got my license suspended. So as an American citizen why should I go to jail for breaking the law yet an illegal should be left alone?

ChuckCS, I was wondering what Arizona law he was referring to and how it discriminates against Hispanics.

To show that a law discriminates against X, one would have to show how the law targets X who are citizens and X who aren't citizens differently from non-X who are citizens and non-X who aren't citizens.

This is what he was talking about:

Arizona Immigration Enforcement Bill Stirs National Debate

Doc, don't be such a wimp! All women lie! It is a fact of life! This is why they are better at it than men.

Any, to be honest. Any city that has more than 1000 year of history

Lucky you! Ireland! The homeland of my fore-fore-father!

Anyway. You probably noticed a major difference between Dublin and, let's say, Los Angeles. Or New York. Or Houston. Or pretty much any city of the United States (save the very original colonies).

Dublin has to build it's modernity by adapting what it had and what has already been built in the past 1000 years. Their road system isn't as efficient as the U.S.'s. Their infrastructure are also less effeciently designed. The whole paradigm behind the road's layout of Ireland hasn't been created while thinking of cars, but of horses and carts.

You end up with a city that has a lot of charm (old montreal is a lot like that, and I am sure quite a few ancient parts of some eastern U.S. cities are too), but that will never reach it's full potential except if you destroy part of what was and you redesign everything in a more efficient way.

I cannot imagine if the whole of Montreal had been designed with the same mentality than the Old Montreal.   But Paris has. London has. Luckily for everybody, they accepted to destroy many elements to allow for some modernity, but many of the layouts of the city are puzzling as hell.

Well, the USA/Europe comparison is kinda the same. You cannot compare Europe to the USA for the same reason you cannot compare European to American cities, as one was built and designed from scratch, with the Grand Scheme in mind, while the other has been the result of a patch-up work that lasted from millenia.

The country of the USA has been designed to be an efficient way of running a Federation of independant states while being independant of the Europeans. You did not had 2000 years of violent backstory, you were all in this together. It worked well, because you "built anew". To compare European/American efficiency, you'd have pretty much to destroy all the societies of Europe and make them build anew, and see how they fare.

The European Union, on the other way, was created to prevent a further bloody conflict (I am taking a big leap here, as I consider the EU to have started up at the first pan-european economic treaty.. which has been created in... err.. the 50s?). It hasn't been created to provide strenght of organisation structure, but simply to strenghten the ties between the various nations composing the Union.

A country built from scratch, that has created it's own culture, that has always existed in post-renaissance modernity.. well.. it's kinda special, don't you think?

The same way, technically, Dubai was supposed to be more "grandiose" than any US city. Since everything has been built with cars in mind (it worked too well). But then, the leaders of that city who took many decisions were kind of idiots. (there is something to be said about our western organisational culture!! )

There are still examples of it, but I would hope that most of the world has changed.  From general acceptance 2000 years ago, to general condemnation of it today.  It is not a light switch with an off and on.  Just a dimmer one that hopefully is being turned up.

Shouldn't that be the other way around?

As for the differences between the cities that Cikomyr listed, I would ask him how many immigrants (legal and illegal) does Dublin have.  How many do the American cities have?

No one stated that the assimilation process was painless.  There are many barriers to overcome, but they are overcome daily in the US.  Out of necessity, and out of sheer force.  While a new immigrant is more likely to seek the solace of similar people, his children gradually lose sight of their old ways.  For a very good reason.  They never knew them!

I have to agree with Leauki that Europe can do it.  And it is painful. They do not have to do it (they have the protection of their history to comfort them from the pain).  But if they want to be considered relevant in the 21st century and beyond, they have to do it.

Dublin had lots of Poles. But they are EU citizens and most seem to have returned to Poland and had no intention of staying.

I am a real immigrant, I guess, although also from another EU country.

In the US, what I did would be considered "moving". Here it was considered getting a second social security number and starting a second life.

I did read it but couldn't find the argument you thought you made.

Did anybody else see it?

You just went on about how the US and Europe cannot be compared. (Which is something we disagree on.)

_I_ am waiting for you to explain WHY the US and Europe cannot be compared.

Of course the cities are different. But in order to say that, they must be compared.

One is apples, another is oranges.  But actually all are fruit.  You point out some differences, now I will point out some things overlooked.

Europe was united at least 2 times in history.  During the Roman empire 2k years ago, and during Charlemagne half that ago.  So it CAN be done.  No one said it would be easy.

One thing that allowed it to happen was a common language (each had their own native tongue, but the business of empire was done with Latin).

Before you had people who really did not care.  Now they do.  I think 300 million (or half that if you want) that want to do something 1 or a few did millennium ago can do it.