Regarding your article "Gambling Nation": you shouldn't consider a verdict of a court as "gambling" or "risky". It's the only thing that any reasonable nation should do to protect its foundamental interests and national sovereignity. Even if the verdict was negative, in international politics and diplomacy, a verdict rarely means something that it is to be followed or violated. It is just an advantage or drawback in negotiations. Here in Greece, our traitor governments are succumbing without any single reaction against the demands of "the institutions" (the IMF, the ECB etc) and the abstract "markets", and here they are the results: plain dictatorship. Censorship everywhere, no human rights, neonazis, police brutality, property confiscations, poverty and misery on every corner in the streets. Why should be considered as "gambling" an appeal to a court claiming well established and possessed rights?
Whatever positive the verdict was or not, it is a moral vindication for the people. The thing that the government did not allow the usurers to grab state assets because of some private crooks' deed. Unfortunately and in contrast to the Icelandic people, Greek people have not yet understood that they could change things and appeal to international courts.
Panagiotis Liberopoulos, Greece