anjohl: BTW, no country is "better" than another....eugenics much?

anjohl: Yup. Read up on "Sharia Law" and "Islamic Republic". NO thank you. Secular all the way bay-bee.

Catshade: You confused me....

anjohl: One country being better would have to ential it's people being better than another people, yadda, yadda, yadda, fascism, yadda, yadda holocaust, yadda, yadda, yugoslavia.

Navagon: Ever heard of the human development report? There are many ways in which a country can be better to live in than another without any implied 'genetic superiority' of its populace.
The fact that you constantly mention such things in this thread and others clearly demonstrates you already know this and are just using eugenics as a cheap attempt to undermine someone else's perspective.

anjohl: Not at all. Noone said we were talking about a country being better to LIVE in, we were talking about whether or not a country *itself* was better. There is obsoletely no possible way to rank which countries are the "best". I wasn't trying to undermine/insult/offend anything or anyone. I like semantics. And I feel they are very important. If your point matters to you, make it clear what exactly your point is, or you have noone to blame but yourself for misunderstandings.
Or, you could be stealth trolling by looking for a misunderstanding where there wasn't one in the first place.

Navagon: Yes, there are ways in which to rank which countries are the best to live in. The UN does it all the time: The Human Development Report.
If you want to pick over semantics then perhaps you should have asked for clarification of what they meant, rather than imply they were inferring genetic inferiority. Which clearly was never the case. As it stands, you're actually making far more erroneous statements than they were.

anjohl: *Nothing* can "rank" countries themselves, they are ranking their standard of living, health standards, etc.

anjohl: Sorry, like I told you before, I don't do shit-slinging on the internet, or anywhere else. The guy made a point, which I corrected and clarified. *Nothing* can "rank" countries themselves, they are ranking their standard of living, health standards, etc.

Navagon: You seem to have a very... unique definition of shit-slinging. Because there was none. Not only that but your standard recourse of name calling and otherwise insulting comments whenever any particular debate doesn't go your way would certainly qualify.
Very unique indeed.
As for the ranking of countries, as Weclock as already stated, the standards detailed in the human development report are commonly accepted as a means of ranking countries. Commonly accepted by UN nations that is.

anjohl: No,they are methods to rank the particular attributes of countries, or a grouping of attributes, IE, "the top ten countries in healthcare", or "the top ten countries economically".

anjohl: And I have not ONCE engaged in shit slinging on this site outside the Gearbox thread, which I did deviously to push some people's buttons on purpose, yours included.

Navagon: Yes, and not one of those ratings is for "top ten countries ethnically".
Not once. Apart from the times you did. For the purposes of trolling too. Riiiight.
Very unique.

anjohl: Ethnic point: The original useage referred to one country being better than another. Sounds like national socialism to me.

anjohl: Second point: No comment. I already informed you I would not sink to your level in order to have a shit slinging match. If you have additional matters to discuss with me regarding this or any other issue, contact me privately. I will not be replying to, or viewing any further discussion in this thread due to the depravity which has seemed to spring up.