u/Silver_Flower668

Historically, we do think of Denmark as a bigger football nation than Greece, and with recency, that’s probably why everybody considers Greece the most unlikely euro winner.
However, after doing some research I’m seeing that 1992 Denmark hadn’t actually even qualified for the euros, they got their entry because Yugoslavia was kicked out because of the war. I would like to point out Greece had properly qualified at minimum. Of course there are a lot more factors in between. But in other words, I’d consider 1992 Denmark less probable than 2004 Greece. What do you guys think?

I’ve been struggling trying to find material that is gonna directly help me on this upcoming exam. I’ve heard they’re a lot like Jeopardy which is my biggest concern when I’m looking for material, what if 95% of what I end up studying isn’t even on the exam? So in a sense, what I am looking for is resources and advice that are gonna directly help me on my exam.

I’ve taken the official practice test last month and had gotten a 73 percent, which was roughly 20 points up from the month before that. I want to bring it up past an 85 for my next practice test sometime this September, and then the final goal is passing the official exam.

The parts I really need work on are Policy, Laws, history of foreign relations, etc. I feel I’m strong in the section of more common world history, geography, demographics, language and whatnot. Does anybody have any helpful resources regarding what I need work on? Thank you.

This has seemed to come out of nowhere. Greece appears to suddenly have tons of young talent who could be part of a future contender. A national team now worth 300m, with Tzolis, Karetsas, Tzolakis, Kostoulos, Koulierakis, Douvikas, Mouzakitis, and Pavlidis, most of them being under 25 years old and now at major clubs. Can this team contend in 2028, 2030, and beyond?

This has seemed to come out of nowhere. Greece appears to suddenly have tons of young talent who could be part of a future contender. A national team now worth 300m, with Tzolis, Karetsas, Tzolakis, Kostoulos, Koulierakis, Douvikas, Mouzakitis, and Pavlidis, most of them being under 25 years old and now at major clubs. Can this team contend in 2028, 2030, and beyond?

So basically the bird is a neutral participant until the ball makes contact. The moment it's hit, that means it has directly influenced the game. Since the bird belongs to a nations environment, any positive contribution from that bird should be credited to the host countries footballing ecosystem.

We already accept homefield advantage like crowd noise and shit. Birds are simply another homefield advantage factor. If your countries ecosystem is producing clutch defensive pigeons or goalscoring seagulls, that's an earned advantage that was earned.

After all, football is the worlds game bro.

For preface, I am a 20 year old University student, majoring in economics, whose been interested in diplomatic affairs since 5th grade. I've dreamed about doing work overseas. In my free time I've studied language, geography, government, and history for fun. As you could imagine I am most interested in being an Economic Officer.

What I am wondering is if it is too early for me to seek to apply. I know that I meet the age requirements already, and I feel that I would already be decently equipped with what I have learned already, if I were to apply for the next exam window. What I am wondering is if should do some sort of pre-requisite like peace corps and obviously finishing University as well.

Does anyone whose entered foreign service at a very young age have any recommendation?

I’ll click the tag no mod because I hate maps I’m not familiar with. However I still get more with-mod server options than ones labeled as no mod. It’s annoying and nullifies the point of me clicking no mod. Anybody else dealing with this?

I’m just seeing suddenly a tone of gore and whatnot and have done nothing that would encourage my algorithm to do so. Is anybody else experiencing this?

In November I got a speeding ticket (54 on 40) that I had paid off. I did not have my insurance card on hand (but I was Insured the time of the ticket) so I was given an additional reinstatement fee of $40 that was required for me to maintain my license. I paid this fee within the required time and kept the virtual receipts. In January I was rear ended in a 4 car accident. I was found 0% at fault but the problem here is that when the Police Officers were collecting information, they told me my license was suspended, and issued me a citation for driving while suspended. I was recommended by the officers to take this issue to the DMV before attending court. I brought the receipts to the DMV, where they told me all they needed was for me to prove I had insurance at the time of the speeding ticket and then pay $10, and my license was actually reinstated this time. I then arrived at traffic court but was dismissed Immediately.

TL;DR Drove without Insurance card on hand, was given Reinstatement fee with my Citation. Reinstatement fee was paid on time, my License was suspended anyways(IDK Why). Got in crash(0% at fault). Police tells me License is Suspended. Got License unsuspended at DMV after proving insurance. Dismissed immediately at Traffic court.

I am a little worried if the academy(granted; all of them are a little different on their standards) would not allow me for having a driving while license suspended citation at all, as I've researched is immediately disqualifying, despite the dismissal of it. Or if I'll have to explain everything that happened. Maybe I'm just overthinking the strictness of background checks. Do you guys think I'll be completely fine?