Jump to content

US foreign policy


Firelord Zuko
 Share

Recommended Posts

@shellhound - I don't think US is messing up in the middle east....they did the right thing...went there to deny those talibans and Al Qaeda their breeding ground....we cant have US pulling out before the job is done...otherwise the extremist will just regroup and strike when the time is right....

 

They will strike at anyone who doesn't believe in their hardcore militant theory.....so r u going to stay home and let them bring the war to you or do u rather cut them off before they have the chance to strike?

 

Much of the tension and violence in the Middle East is a response to Western interference. The longer we stay there, the more people we radicalize into terrorists. If military action is required, let it be that of the nations where the terrorists are. The cost of training and equipping these armies would be more than offset by the money we save by getting out of the region.

 

We could even give people an alternative to joining up with the radicals. Send foreign aid, develop their economies, and significantly raise the standard of living. "Why would I go off to fight and die when I could live comfortably at home?"

  • Upvote 1

"Your 'order' is built on sand. Tomorrow the revolution will already 'raise itself with a rattle' and announce with fanfare, to your terror: I was, I am, I will be!" - Rosa Luxemburg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The verse is saying that Allah said that to the angels, not commanding the Muslims to do it. That is downright bull%@#$.

Talking about people who claim to be Muslims but refuse to follow any of the tenants of Islam(basically they say they are Muslims then proceed to undermine it). Also talking about the Qurish tribe(who they were fighting).

 

Earlier in the surah

 

Taking a few lines from a couple thousand ones, removing the context, then editing it is hardly a fair way to prove your point.

 

And look! I can do it too!

002.191

YUSUFALI: And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

PICKTHAL: And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

SHAKIR: And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.

NODOLsmall.png.a7aa9c0a05fa266425cd7e83d8ccb3dd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-snip-

...

*sigh* 

Once more, removing context.

 

The verse right above the one you used

 

(Yusuf Ali)

02:190

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

 

And the one right below it

02:192

But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

 

 

Also, I thought you were a patriot? How can you be against the idea that oppression is worse than slaughter? 

Edited by underlordgc

Orbis Wars   |   CSI: UPN   |   B I G O O F   |   PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings

TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea.

On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said:
Sheepy said:

I'm retarded, you win

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of what any of those verses say, if you truly believe that they had planned on conquering the world because they consider us infidels, why did they only start attacking us when we started !@#$ing around in their countries? You don't think that's just coincidence do you?

uHQTKq6.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of what any of those verses say, if you truly believe that they had planned on conquering the world because they consider us infidels, why did they only start attacking us when we started !@#$ing around in their countries? You don't think that's just coincidence do you?

>start when we started !@#$ing them

 

1976 B.C. Jewish immigration to Canaan begins under Patriarch Abraham.

1926 B.C. Abraham offers Isaac on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem (future site of the Temple Mount).

1406 B.C. Jews under Joshua begin military conquest of Canaan.

996 B.C. King David captures Jerusalem from Jebusites and makes it the capital of Israel (2 Samuel 5:6-10).

996 B.C. - 636 A.D. Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.  Despite being conquered and ruled by various peoples (Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Egyptians, and Romans), the Jewish people remained the dominant population in the Land (especially in the four "holy cities" of Judaism: Jerusalem, Hebron, Tiberias, and Safed) with various interim periods of independence.

70 A.D. Roman destruction of Jewish Second Temple.

135 A.D. Roman emperor Hadrian changes name of country to Palestine and Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina.

614 A.D.  Persian King Chosroes II favors Jews and offers opportunity to rebuild the Temple.

637 A.D. Arab Muslim invasion and conquest of Palestine (Muslim Caliph entered Jerusalem in 638).

1099 A.D. Arab and Non-Arab Muslims rule in Palestine.

1500 A.D. Period of Jewish expulsions from Spain, Portugal, France, Germany, Italy, England, Austria, Hungary, Lithuania, Silesia, and the Crimea.

1290 A.D. Periods of Crusader rule in Palestine.

1516 A.D. Muslim rule returns under Egyptian Mameluks, who allow Jews to live within walls of Jerusalem and visit the Western Wall.

1517 A.D. Ottoman Turkish Muslim rule under Suleiman, who writes a firman recognizing right of Jews to the Western Wall and designates it as the Jews' place of worship.

1845 - 1933 A.D. Period of European Anti-Semitism.

1862 Publication of Rome and Jerusalem by Moses Hess.

1869 First Jewish quarter of Nahlat Shiva built outside walls of Jerusalem's Old City.

1881 Assassination of Tsar Alexander II followed by persecution of Russian Jews.

1882 - 1903 Publication and distribution of The Protocols of Zion (anti-Semitic propaganda).

1904 Beginning of second Aliyah.

1905 Seventh Zionist Congress rejects alternative to Palestine as aim of Zionism.

1908-1909 Arab opposition to Zionist settlements intensifies.

1914-18 First World War (Arabs and Jews aid British to overthrow Turkish control of Palestine).

1915-16 Sykes-Picot Agreement.

The Sykes-Picot agreement is a secret understanding concluded in May 1916, during World War I, between Great Britain and France, with the assent of Russia, for the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire.

The agreement led to the division of Turkish-held Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine into various French and British-administered areas. The agreement took its name from its negotiators, Sir Mark Sykes of Britain and Georges Picot of France.

1917 Before the end of the war, at a time when British hopes were buoyed by their invasion of the Middle East under General Edmund Allenby, the British cabinet issued the famous Balfour Declaration advocating a Jewish national home in Palestine.  Arab Revolt: Lawrence of Arabia takes Aqaba and British General Allenby enters Jerusalem.

1919 Chaim Weizmann leads Zionist delegation at Paris Peace Conference.

1919-1923 Third Aliyah

1920-1921 Arab anti-Jewish riots in Jerusalem over holy places.

1924 - 1932 Fourth Aliyah

1929 Arab riots in Jerusalem, and massacre of Jews in Hebron and Safed.

1930 Passfield White Paper seeks British disengagement from Jewish national home, aspects of Balfour Declaration and Palestine Mandate.

1931 Irgun (Jewish Resistance) established.

1933 - 1945 Jews search for safety as anti-Semitism, pogroms, and persecutions force the Jewish population from Europe.

1935 Fifth Aliyah.

1937 Peel Commission recommends partition of Palestine into separate Arab (Palestinian) and Jewish States.

1937-1938 Arab-Jewish conflict over British allowance of Jewish immigration.

1938 Whit Paper repudiates partition and restricts Jewish immigration.

1941 Muslim Mufti in Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini relocated to Berlin, meets with German Chancellor Adolf Hitler and offers to assist in his campaign to exterminate world Jewry by creating a fascist Arab state.

1941-1945 Holocaust occurs with orchestrated German extermination of Jews in Europe.

1945 President Truman supports Jewish refugee immigration to Palestine.

 

Then the Cold War starts and we attempt to not have the whole world against us. Sorry for defending freedom and the right to buy your own house. 

 

EDIT: Bolded some of the major conflicts. 

 

Once more, removing context.

Citing a whole verse is not removing content. 

Edited by WISD0MTREE

NODOLsmall.png.a7aa9c0a05fa266425cd7e83d8ccb3dd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Forewarning: I didn't read this whole thread and only wanted to throw my 2c in on a couple of posts here, which I've quoted. Also, don't hate me if I disagree with you.

 

 

China has 1.35 billion people. If they were to get a just cause for war, they could amass a huge army, even though they won't be trained as well. I'm not saying that they will, cause they won't (unless some politician screws up) because their exports to us make up such a huge amount of their economy. 

 

But we at least need to spend more on military than welfare.  :mellow:

 

It is.*

​*With the exception of Predator Drones

 

Reminds me of the US Civil War. The south was better trained, Lee was a better general, but Grant had more troops and was willing to let them die.

 

Alright, I'll start, and you can shit all over my ideas. :D

 

 

I believe that the USA should be much less involved on the world stage. We should drastically cut military spending, pull back our military projection massively, and find ways besides permanently occupying the middle east to keep the pipeline flowing. We should invest much more in systems for preventing/mitigating the damage of nuclear attacks using the extra funds we might have from cutting spending elsewhere.

 

You should check out the Hegemonic Stability Theory - It's a really interesting idea. Basically it states that the reason other nations don't spend so much on military is because they don't have to -- we do it for them. We are the "police" who keep everyone from fighting each other. Theoretically, if we cut our spending and let everyone try and take care of themselves there would be a lot more conflicts. So long as one nation has a big enough military that no one else can mess with them, they set the 'rules', and we can pretty much force everyone to play nice with each other (granted I'm not talking World Peace here, we still have conflicts, but we haven't seen a WW3 yet since we've been the dominating superpower). 

 

In my opinion we need to be the giant presence we are around the world - without us things could be a lot worse.

  • Upvote 1

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would go back to a pre-Great War status and stay out of everyone's business. I don't know if that is even possible anymore.

 

Content is very distinctly different from context.

 

And where, pray tell, have the Canaanites gone?

Killed by Israelites?

 

Regardless of what any of those verses say, if you truly believe that they had planned on conquering the world because they consider us infidels, why did they only start attacking us when we started !@#$ing around in their countries? You don't think that's just coincidence do you?

World domination has been pursued by many peoples throughout time.

Sykes-Picot and Balfour are the primary causes of the middle easts problems. I would not say Islam preaches world domination but it is a very political religion and there are many interpretations of it, it's history and writings. Jihad is not what western governments make it to be.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad

It is really no different than Christians and their missionaries or crusades. It just depends on your interpretation of Islam.

 

Also, if you guys are going to argue over how the Quaran is worded, its meaning and context, then it is highly suggested that you refrain from using any translation other than the original Arabic script. Arguing the fine details translated in a language like English is a self defeating argument.

Edited by Afya

PicsArt_1407833397607_zpsfunr9x0a.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@shellhound - I don't think US is messing up in the middle east....they did the right thing...went there to deny those talibans and Al Qaeda their breeding ground....we cant have US pulling out before the job is done...otherwise the extremist will just regroup and strike when the time is right....

They will strike at anyone who doesn't believe in their hardcore militant theory.....so r u going to stay home and let them bring the war to you or do u rather cut them off before they have the chance to strike?

The more military intervention in the middle east there is, the more inspiration there is for pursuing extreme ideologies. Every innocent life taken fills a family with spite. America can not stop extremist ideologies through force. Attempting that path only fuels the problem they are fighting.

The US has been in Afghanistan and Iraq for about 13 years now and during that time extremist Islam has only grown (a lot).

So how would you "finish the job" when an entire coalition of world powers still can't after 13 years?

  • Upvote 1

PicsArt_1407833397607_zpsfunr9x0a.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is really no different than Christians and their missionaries or crusades. It just depends on your interpretation of Islam.

 

I would just like to point out that crusading is not a part of Christianity.

 

 

 

You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. - Matthew 5:38-41

 

In fact, verses like these seem to hold that no form of violence is acceptable, regardless of circumstance ("do not resist an evil person").

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_pacifism

 

This would mean that the crusades had no basis in faith. However, to quote the article you submitted:

 

 

However, there is consensus amongst Islamic scholars that the concept of jihad will always include armed struggle against persecution and oppression.

 

As such, I would contend that there is a fundamental difference between ideal Christian and Muslim behaviour.

 

Don't get me wrong, though. The violence going down right now is because of western imperialism and lack of respect for national sovereignty.

"Your 'order' is built on sand. Tomorrow the revolution will already 'raise itself with a rattle' and announce with fanfare, to your terror: I was, I am, I will be!" - Rosa Luxemburg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How?

(First off, I don't follow a generic view of Islam. In fact, I don't consider myself as being part of any particular religion or doctrine. Religion is only attempts at translating Gods words into the words of men).

Jihad means "to struggle."

I personally interpret Jihad in a non violent way. To mean a spiritual struggle within myself regarding faith. And a physical struggle against those who may try to oppress or physically fight my beliefs.

I don't see it in an aggressive way but rather a defensive way, reactionary at most.

On the topic of Christianity, I see no difference in the amount of violence. Not at all. In fact, other than books written by men I see little difference between the two. Christianity and it's founding is a part of Islam. As well as Judaism and Zoroastrianism. All of these worship the same God. It is when the human element and our desire to translate and share the words of Allah with the world, that his message looses it's greatness.

Such greatness can never be written or spoken in the words of men while still carrying the actual message.

The true language of Allah is silence. The true word of Allah is written within yourself.

PicsArt_1407833397607_zpsfunr9x0a.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US has been in Afghanistan and Iraq for about 13 years now and during that time extremist Islam has only grown (a lot).

I'll tell you how ISIS formed. Power suction from a dipshit president removing everything at once.

NODOLsmall.png.a7aa9c0a05fa266425cd7e83d8ccb3dd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll tell you how ISIS formed. Power suction from a !@#$ president removing everything at once.

ISIS formed when we invaded Iraq.

Why do you think we stayed there for a decade after the Iraqi Army was defeated? It's because the invasion of Iraq was baseless, everyone knew it. Arabs saw this for what it was. An unjust invasion of an Arab nation.

Islamic extremism suddenly explodes in popularity.

IS has its roots in Iraq. I started out as Jama'at al-Tawhid wa-al-Jihad during the war. This group would later merge with others and pledge allegiance to Bin Laden and Al Qaeda in 2006, renaming themselves as the Mujahadin Shura Council (Al-Quada inIraq).

Eventually the two groups spread apart in their goals. Shura Council becomes more influential, powerful and their Khuwarij politics start becoming self evident. Al Quada disavowes them.

Still disguised to most of the world (especially the west) as Sunnis, the alliance, now a consolidated as a singular organization, calls themselves Islamic State of Iraq (ISIL)

[Note: Islamic State of Iraq never referred to themselves as ISIL/ISIS. Insinuating such would have lost them the support of allies in Syria, Al Nusrah.]

At first, the goal of this group was to establish an Islamic State in Iraq. However, after they gained much support and influence in Syria using their profound propaganda techniques and experience, they launched an invasion of Iraq. Having much intelligence from within the Iraqi Army they made amazing advances into 1/3 of the country, taking major cities and humiliating the Iraqi Army. They announce a Caliphate under the rule of  Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi with the intention of creating a Caliphate and ending the borders set by the Sykes-Picot agreement.

By doing this, they effectively challenge not only any nation but also every other Mujahadin or extremist group in the middle east who doesn't pledge allegiance to Baghdadi and their Khuwarij ideal.

 

And here we are now.

 

I can't say that Saddam was better, but at least he wasn't committing genocide (after we invaded him before) and blatant imperialism under a Khuwarij ideal disguised as Sunni for the sake of propaganda and gaining blind support.

 

I don't like blaming people, but if you know the history of the region it is very clear where all this originates. But even then I guess it goes back further than WWI. The oldest origins of Islamic State are as Khuwarij which are older than America's occupation or withdrawal.

If you think anyone can stop this ideology through military after 13 years of war, declared by the most sophisticated coalition to ever exist, which is not only failing but greatly encouraging the problem.....

Then I am glad you are not leading NATO militaries.

PicsArt_1407833397607_zpsfunr9x0a.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ISIS formed when we invaded Iraq.

Why do you think we stayed there for a decade after the Iraqi Army was defeated? It's because the invasion of Iraq was baseless, everyone knew it. Arabs saw this for what it was. An unjust invasion of an Arab nation.

Islamic extremism suddenly explodes in popularity.

IS has its roots in Iraq. I started out as Jama'at al-Tawhid wa-al-Jihad during the war. This group would later merge with others and pledge allegiance to Bin Laden and Al Qaeda in 2006, renaming themselves as the Mujahadin Shura Council (Al-Quada inIraq).

Eventually the two groups spread apart in their goals. Shura Council becomes more influential, powerful and their Khuwarij politics start becoming self evident. Al Quada disavowes them.

Still disguised to most of the world (especially the west) as Sunnis, the alliance, now a consolidated as a singular organization, calls themselves Islamic State of Iraq (ISIL)

[Note: Islamic State of Iraq never referred to themselves as ISIL/ISIS. Insinuating such would have lost them the support of allies in Syria, Al Nusrah.]

At first, the goal of this group was to establish an Islamic State in Iraq. However, after they gained much support and influence in Syria using their profound propaganda techniques and experience, they launched an invasion of Iraq. Having much intelligence from within the Iraqi Army they made amazing advances into 1/3 of the country, taking major cities and humiliating the Iraqi Army. They announce a Caliphate under the rule of  Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi with the intention of creating a Caliphate and ending the borders set by the Sykes-Picot agreement.

By doing this, they effectively challenge not only any nation but also every other Mujahadin or extremist group in the middle east who doesn't pledge allegiance to Baghdadi and their Khuwarij ideal.

 

And here we are now.

 

I can't say that Saddam was better, but at least he wasn't committing genocide (after we invaded him before) and blatant imperialism under a Khuwarij ideal disguised as Sunni for the sake of propaganda and gaining blind support.

 

I don't like blaming people, but if you know the history of the region it is very clear where all this originates. But even then I guess it goes back further than WWI. The oldest origins of Islamic State are as Khuwarij which are older than America's occupation or withdrawal.

If you think anyone can stop this ideology through military after 13 years of war, declared by the most sophisticated coalition to ever exist, which is not only failing but greatly encouraging the problem.....

Then I am glad you are not leading NATO militaries.

The way I see it right now, is that we can't get very far without a stable government in Iraq. Whether that be an oppressive dictatorship or a benevolent democracy, the country needs a strong leader and people who approve of and will fight for the government. ISIS will continue as is if this doesn't happen, although they won't get far without dealing with Kurds, the FSA, or the Syrian Army on their other fronts.

YkvbNCA.jpg

You're no longer protecting the II? We have still teamed with II and TAC (and others) to rival The Covenants. This is getting complex.

#FA_Problems

Big problems for TSG. Really, not kidding.

If Casey and Cyradis are King and Queen does that mean they're married?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I see it right now, is that we can't get very far without a stable government in Iraq. Whether that be an oppressive dictatorship or a benevolent democracy, the country needs a strong leader and people who approve of and will fight for the government. ISIS will continue as is if this doesn't happen, although they won't get far without dealing with Kurds, the FSA, or the Syrian Army on their other fronts.

Syria already belongs to IS and FSA has absolutely no political agenda or voice in the war. This is why they lost popularity immediately. They have no goals other than removing Assad. They have been overshadowed by Al-Nusrah who seeks the exact same thing as IS under a different leader.

Al-Nusrah has already destroyed Syrias army to the point that Assad winning is a big gamble.

I would say that the Kurds (with American support) are the only formidable force fighting IS.

The issue I see is that the commonly accepted solution is aggression. Which will not work. The Khawarij have carved out a state in what is basically their homeland and Khawarij culture praises martyrdom to the point where it is not just expected of all men in their society to die a Martyre, but nearly a requirement.

Their culture is the basis of what we call Islamic Extremism. But they have also accomplished all of this through propaganda and lies. Claiming to be Sunni or "original Islam," to gain support. I fear the only end to this will be with a sea of blood because their entire culture is based on death.

I am sad for the Arab world. :(

PicsArt_1407833397607_zpsfunr9x0a.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How?

(First off, I don't follow a generic view of Islam. In fact, I don't consider myself as being part of any particular religion or doctrine. Religion is only attempts at translating Gods words into the words of men).

Jihad means "to struggle."

I personally interpret Jihad in a non violent way. To mean a spiritual struggle within myself regarding faith. And a physical struggle against those who may try to oppress or physically fight my beliefs.

I don't see it in an aggressive way but rather a defensive way, reactionary at most.

 

The only difference in this area is that physical struggle is permitted in Islam, but forbidden in Christianity. This means that Jihadists could use their religion to justify their actions, whereas the Crusaders could not.

"Your 'order' is built on sand. Tomorrow the revolution will already 'raise itself with a rattle' and announce with fanfare, to your terror: I was, I am, I will be!" - Rosa Luxemburg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only difference in this area is that physical struggle is permitted in Islam, but forbidden in Christianity. This means that Jihadists could use their religion to justify their actions, whereas the Crusaders could not.

Yes, this is correct, though originally Jihad meant a struggle.

Quote from Wikipedia: "Jihad (English pronunciation: /dʒɪˈhÉ‘Ëd/Arabicجهاد‎ Ç§ihÄd [dÊ’iˈhæËd]), an Islamic term, is a religious duty of Muslims. In Arabic, the word jihÄd translates as a noun meaning "struggle" or "resisting"."

YkvbNCA.jpg

You're no longer protecting the II? We have still teamed with II and TAC (and others) to rival The Covenants. This is getting complex.

#FA_Problems

Big problems for TSG. Really, not kidding.

If Casey and Cyradis are King and Queen does that mean they're married?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest problem with the US and other countries like russia and china is they don't know when their wrong and sometimes I think not even they know when they are

King of Thundera and Demigod of Economics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For once, I have to agree with Grillick.

Not sure if you are learning or that you like being a smart !@$.

 

The thing about both the Wahhabi and the Kharijites is that they remind me of a less extreme version of the Qarmatians. With what both groups are doing I don't see any peaceful solution, only by killing their leaders and destabilizing the entire movement can they be stopped (short of killing them all of course). The problem is, without any sort of strong government in Iraq, Syria, or Afghanistan, the problems would just continue with more sects and bloodthirsty terrorists taking the place of them. When someone has nothing they are more willing to die than anyone living in comfort can imagine.

Saddam was a tyrant, but he was awfully good at keeping his people in line.

Edited by underlordgc
  • Upvote 1

Orbis Wars   |   CSI: UPN   |   B I G O O F   |   PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings

TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea.

On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said:
Sheepy said:

I'm retarded, you win

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.