Over the past few years, there has been a lot of information in the news about dog flu or as it is otherwise known, canine flu. More recently, a new bird flu or avian flu has emerged that has been spreading to humans too. With all this going on, it’s enough to make you want to lock the doors, keep your dog safely hidden away and wait for it all to pass!

The good news is, you and your dog don’t have to go into hiding to avoid catching anything. A few simple precautions will keep you safe and allow you and your dog to enjoy the outdoors to the full.

Let’s start out by outlining some hard facts about dog flu or canine flu. The highly contagious virus which is responsible for canine flu was originally spotted in around 2004 in the greyhound racing population. Many dogs died as a result and many more taken ill. That said, the virus is shown to be deadly in only 10% of the most susceptible dogs. I.e. Young puppies or older dogs whose immune systems are weakened.

More recently, canine flu has entered the domestic dog population. Although this may be the case, there are steps you can take to protect your dog.

Firstly, be aware that the AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association) has recommendations for good infection control practices. Wherever you take your dog be it a groomer, pet store, boarding kennel, animal shelter or dog show, always ensure that they meet the AVMA standards. Any place that your dog is likely to be closely contained with other dogs in greater numbers than usual, always check those guidelines are being met.

You need to enquire as to how they cope with suspected dog flu cases. How do they isolate dogs that develop symptoms? Do they have a vet on call? When/how do they notify owners that their dog is showing symptoms. Asking all these questions will help you assess whether your dog will be o.k. there.

Additionally, if you think that you may have come into contact with a dog carrying the canine flu virus, wash your hands and clothes and anything you may have touched. Do this before coming into contact with other animals.

At the time of writing this article, there is no available vaccination for the canine flu. If you feel your dog may have canine flu or been exposed to canine flu, do not take them anywhere where other dogs will be congregating. Seek veterinary advice immediately.

If your dog does have dog flu the good news is that most dogs will recover in anything from 10 to 30 days. Most dogs will suffer with a persistent cough and a runny nose.

More severe cases will involve a fever and possibly pneumonia. The use of an intravenous may be needed with a course of antibiotics. Most dogs will recover from canine flu if cared for properly by a veterinarian.

Luckily, there is no evidence at the moment to suggest that people are at risk from catching dog flu. If you are worried about this then you can breathe easy.

Originally, the canine flu stemmed from the equine influenza virus which has been around for over 40 years. In this time, there has been no evidence to suggest anybody has caught the flu virus from a horse that had contracted it.

If you have concerns about dog flu, don’t fear taking your dog for walks or meeting other dogs. Your dog needs to exercise and socialize as much as ever. The best course of action would be to take the above precautions mentioned in this article. Find out as much additional information as you can and just be aware. That way your dog gets to enjoy life, and stay safe at the same time.

Article By Andrew Strachan. Find lots more information about different dog breeds and types of dogs at http://www.types-of-dogs.com. Lots of help and advice too.

Free pre-registration of sg-domains at Second Level

Cologne,13 August 2004. ICANN accredited registrar Secura
announces today, that the company is accepting free
pre-registration of sg-domains at second level.
(https://www.domainregistry.de/sg-domain.html)

Singapure is the financial centre of the Far East. The registry
has decided to introduce sg-domains at second level since 15
September 2004.

Part of the rule that gives priority to register 2nd level names
of “.sg” is the ownership of an existing 3rd level name (.com.sg
/ net.sg / org.sg / edu.sg / per.sg). The cut off date for 3rd
level name to be entitled to the priority to register 2nd level
names is 6 September 2004 before 5 pm. Therefore all 3rd level
name had to be registered before this period to enjoy the
priority in this category.You can influence the chance to get a
second level sg-domain by registering now a third level domain.
(Please note that there are other priority before this category
which will be explained in details under item 3.3)

3. SUNRISE PERIOD

3.1 During the Sunrise Period all individuals and entities are
eligible to apply for any second-level domain name. Applicants
will be required to submit a declaration form (form to be
published soon) together with supporting documents, if any,
indicating their status (i.e. trademark holders, Unregistered
well-known trademark Holder, government bodies, existing
registrants or new applicants). This form has to be submitted to
+49 221 2571213 via fax.

The sunrise period is 1 months for the application of
second-level domain names under the top level domain of .sg.
Applications for second-level domain names during the Sunrise
Period will not be processed on a first-come-firstserved basis
but will be processed subject to the requirements and procedures
set out in the following guidelines. 3.2 Where there are two or
more applicants for the same second-level domain name the
priority for allocation will be determined at the end of the
Sunrise Period in the following order:

(a) Holders of registered trademarks.Holders of word marks which
are registered with the Intellectual Property Office of
Singapore (IPOS).

(b)Unregistered Trademarks, which belong to Holders of well
known trademark holders

(c) Government Organisations that have a current Registrant
Agreement with SGNIC in relation to a current third level domain
name registered under the ‘gov.sg’ category and is identical to
the second level domain name that they want to register. For
example, in the case of holder of ABC.gov.sg, the second level
domain name it wants to register would be ABC.sg.

(d) Applicants that have a current Registrant Agreement with
SGNIC in relation to a current third level domain name
registered under the ‘com/org/net/edu/per.sg’ categories and is
identical to the second-level domain name that is under
application (i.e. existing 3rd level registrants). For example,
in the case of holder of XYZ.com.sg, the second-level domain
name it wants to register would be XYZ.sg. The third-level ‘.sg’
domain name with SGNIC must be registered before 5:00pm on 6
Sept 2004. The name applied under the 2nd level must be exactly
the same as the one under the 3rd level and the organization
name and/or first name, last name (for the case of .per.sg) must
be an exact match of the one provided by the 3rd level domain
name. In addition, the domain must be in “Active” status.
Submission for domains in “Expired” or “Deleted” status will not
be considered for application.

3.3 Where there are two or more applicants for the same
second-level domain name within each of the Group, a bidding
will be conducted to allocate these second-level domain names.

3.4 All individuals and entities are eligible to apply for
second level ‘.sg’ domain name. Foreign-based registrants have
to appoint a local administrative contact or register through
their local office.Secura is providing automatically the local
administrative contact.

4.1 The restrictions on the types of domain names to be
registered are the same as the 3rd level domain names
specifically: (a) Names, which contain certain words such as
“Temasek”, “Singapore”, “Singapura” and its variation,
“Singapore Government” or “President” or any other words that
can mislead people to think there is link to the Government;
Names, which contains “SGNIC”, “NIC” and its variations; Names,
which are obscene, scandalous, indecent or contrary to law, or
morality (e.g. “sex” or any connotations with sex or any
sex-related activities); (b) Names, which are geographical names
or names of countries (e.g. Singapore, Malaysia, Japan, etc.);
(c) Abbreviated names (either on their own or in combination
with other characters) of existing generic top-level domain name
(gTLDs) (i.e. .com, .org, .net, edu, .gov, .per, .aero, .coop,
.biz, .info, .museum, .name and .pro) and any other gTLDs
created or to be created by ICANN in the future; Names, such as
“www”, “http”, “https” or “http-www”; Names, which are similar
or identical to domain names registered under other domain name
space and which SGNIC deems undesirable; and Names, which
consist of all numerals.

5.1 ALLOCATION RESULTS SGNIC does not guarantee that all
applicants will get a second-level domain name based on their
current corresponding identical third level domain name
registered with SGNIC even if the applicants apply correctly and
on time. This is either because another applicant with a higher
priority may have also applied for the same secondlevel domain
name or the second-level domain name applied for has been
reserved by SGNIC not to be available to the general public.

6. OBJECTION PERIOD 6.1 An objection period of [14 calendar
days] is provided for the public to raise objections 6.2 A
person raising an objection to an allocation result shall
provide evidence that the second-level domain name allocated by
SGNIC during the Sunrise Period did not comply with the
Guidelines.

6.3 All disputes in relation to second-level domain names
(except disputes arising from the allocation results announced
during the Sunrise Period) will be dealt with in accordance with
the Singapore Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, Rules and
Supplemental Rules (”Dispute Resolution Policy”) referred to in
the Registrant Agreement regardless of when the second-level
domain name was registered. All applicants shall not commence
any court proceedings or administrative proceedings under the
Dispute Resolution Policy during the objection period or if the
person had filed an objection with SGNIC.

7. GENERAL LAUNCH Applications from public on
first-come-first-served basis will commenced on 3 Jan 2005. The
pre-registation at https://www.domainregistry.de/sg-domain.html
starts on 14 August 2004.

Hans-Peter Oswald https://www.domainregistry.de/sg-domain.html

NATO enlargement is doubtless one of the most important issues
in NATO-USA relations and in attitude of American politics
towards this organization. Therefore, in dealing with
American-European relations within NATO, it is impossible to
question the issue of enlargement of this alliance.

NATO enlargement towards Central and Eastern European states was
originally the major project in seconding NATO’s viability. The
purpose of the first enlargement round was regarded by the USA
in preservation of NATO as a form of military-political
cooperation between the USA and Europe and conservation of
American influence on European security along with strengthening
Western military potential for resistance of possible, even in
post-bipolar era, threats from the East.

To this end, and also with the aim of overcoming alarm of many
European allies as to Russian attitude towards enlargement,
American diplomacy took to creation and consolidation in
Western-European and American political discourses of idea on
additional NATO’s function as an organization focusing on spread
of democratic values and institutions and stabilizing internal
political situation in member-countries.

North Atlantic Alliance as instrument of promotion of democracy
and stability was accepted by the European leaders as
indubitably necessary. In that way, having ensured Europeans’
consent to such broadened understanding of NATO’s function, the
United States consequently brought the conflict with Russia to
acceptable intensity level by providing Moscow with “special
status” in its relations with the Alliance, which was fixed in
Fundamental Act between Russian Federation and NATO, signed in
May of 1997.

The current article isn’t aimed at complete revealing of all the
details of NATO enlargement process but instead focuses on the
principal issues of American policy shift regarding NATO in
general and its enlargement in particular.

While in the early January of 1994 the text of President’s
,,State of the Union” speech noted that American security will
further depend on the US ability to most effectively ensure
democratic development of Eastern European states, in this way
putting particular emphasis on principal role of NATO
enlargement for American interests, in the late 1990s and early
2000s this approach fundamentally changed.

When in the middle 1990s there emerged an issue of NATO
preservation in new circumstances, the United States regarded
their North Atlantic allies as potential assistants in carrying
out their military operations worldwide in interests of America.
But Washington’s expectations concerning significant military
contribution of Allies confronted with a cruel reality. For the
USA, 1990s became a period of more intense economic growth as
compared to the Europeans. This was attended by fast
technological progress, particularly in military industry. At
the same time, European Allies shortened their military budgets.
Thus, 4,565 million dollars, being merely 13-% rise in American
military budget, turned out to exceed total budget of any of
NATO allies. By the end of the decade, this trend led to the
fatal gap of Europe from the level of American military and
technological potential. The Allies, apart from Great Britain in
some particular cases, proved simply unable to grant the USA
assistance in military operations requiring decent technological
level.

This gap very soon was revealed in action yet before the launch
of second NATO enlargement debate. Thus, among the NATO
resources involved in Yugoslav military campaign in
spring-summer of 1999, American resources played the principal
role: about 60-70% of air force and 80-90% of cruise missiles
were American. During anti-Talib operation of autumn 2001 even
British contribution couldn’t be compared to American: more than
90% of resources and 95% of advanced technology armaments were
supplies by the Americans. American government was aware,
already before taking decision on anti-Talib war launch, that
there was no chance of reckoning on something more than
political support and some complimentary military functions on
NATO’s part.

The last point demonstrating Washington’s attitude to the
enlargement process was elaboration of Iraqi operation
implementation scenario in 2002-2003, which didn’t even include
NATO as military structure along with a number of minor allies.
Among other reasons, this happened because absence of internal
accord within North Atlantic Treaty Organization concerning
necessity of the operation, firmly advocated by the USA and
Great Britain.

Consequently, American interest in NATO as a block of military
allies in many ways expired. The main mission of the Alliance
for the United States now turned into political and back support
of American military operations.

Such shift of mission caused change of American agenda for NATO.
In such circumstances, avalanche-like Alliance enlargement
became the most appropriate way of enlargement. Therefore, on
Prague summit, the invitations to enter NATO were made to seven
states: Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovak Republic,
Slovenia, and Estonia. Many of these states had to undergo a
long way at least to reach the level of first-wave entrant
states. However, in what concerns political support of American
military initiatives, newly invited counties showed their
support of American policy right away after Prague summit in
discussions, and then in actions relating to Iraq in 2002-2004.

Since mid 2002, American political analysts have been growingly
talking on shifting NATO’s role from military ally of the United
States and instrument of collective protection of Allies’
security into “platform for coordination and facilitation of
joint diplomatic actions with the uniformly thinking allies”.
Besides, another advantage from mass enlargement of NATO to
Easter-European countries was mentioned: possibility for the
United States to “concentrate on other regions” after
enlargement.

Read other articles in the series at Politics.