Anyone else worried about Syria?

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Steve
G, he could have exported them there to shield them from inspector's eyes, sir.

Along with half his army.

[StSanta]

Dowding: here ya go, UN resolutions critical of Israel that have been vetoed by the US:

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html

At any rate, not pretty reading, really. Notice that Bush Sr. was one of the US representatives putting down the veto .

Steve, you say let Africans starve; solve overcrowding this way. I sincerely hope that this outlook comes from having lived a sheltered and protected life with little suffering except that which cannot possibly be avoided. Such an attitude bears witness to either great ignorance on the matter at hand or a  great lack of humanity.

Perhaps if you first hand experienced a child, victim of the circumstances created by adults around him, slowly withering away, drawing his last breath as you watch, perhaps if you experienced this you'd realize that ethnicity, skin colour or place of origin has little to do with the value of human life. I find it sad to see such an attitude in a human being; that some are üntermenschen not fit to be helped, yet others must be protected against even the slightest threat, even if it means the deaths of millions of innocent people.

A 'nice war would solve everything', you write. This makes me sure that you're not cold blooded and cynically oriented around your own particular group; it is a statement of true ignorance of the facts on this matter. Wars have so far had a very small impact on population growth or lack thereof. Many were killed during WWII, but the baby boom that followed more than made up for the men and women lost during the conflict. War, while sometimes necessary, is by no means an effective way of controlling population growth.

It is not by accident that highly developed industrialized prosperous countries have only a slight or even a negative population growth. We do not need children as a way to secure our old age - and we want the time to pursue happiness so having 10 children is not an option. Fewer children means better care as well, and so on.

As has been pointed out (by Muckmaw) I believe, a quick look at history will show that all great empires have failed and either disappeared or lost their power. Many felt that 'might makes right' and a good deal of great civilizations treated the known world as their playground, to rape, exploit and use as they saw fit. Some of the descendants of those people now live retched lives in squalor and poverty. It seems the civilizations that have survived the passing of times have been the moderate ones - and even those have changed so much as to be utterly unrecognizable compared to their former selves. There aren't many Danes raiding Europe anymore, unless you refer to blonde babes with big tits picking up scores of southern Europeans wherever they go.

The US, too, will come into a decline. Whether the US will be consumed by its enemies or just be slowly overcome by new aspiring superpowers remain to be seen. One thing is true, however; everything must cease.

Steve, I do not mean to throw trash at you as a person; I am not calling you ignorant. I'm saying that your comments are founded in shallow gut-feelings stemming from the life you've lead so far, and that those gut feelings are a long way from close to reality. They sound good when talking to your chaps at the bar or the coworkers over a cup of coffee, but I can ensure you; live with impoverished, starving Africans for three months, and you shall see those comments for what they are. It'll be revealed for you that humanity comes in many different forms and colours, yet it is all the same.

Experience a war first hand  - the raping, the atrocities, the barrel of a gun justice, and you will realize that war is neither nice or an effective way to control population.

Gonna get off soap box. You said you were serious about your views, so I thought it best to be serious myself for a bit. Feel what you feel, think what you think. I just have to do what I must do - try to get you to think about the consequences of what you suggest.

In a thousand years, perhaps the mighty Congo Democratic Republic cstarts considering stopping all aid to the impoverished war raged region of the Americas - it is a good idea because then there'd be no babies for them to send food to. Such reversals have happened countless times in history before. ****e dude, those starving people *could have been us*, had we been born to the wrong parents (I still cannot figure out how that physically can be possible, but then again, English is an odd language ).

Off I go. If possible, I'd like to ask of you to see all people as humans. Given other circumstances, the very people you condemn by not assisting could have been your friends.

I sound like such an idealist heh. But it is much better to be a realistic idealist than a realistic cynic, in terms of life quality

[Martlet]

HAHA,

I love living in the super power.

[Steve]

Santa quote:"Steve, you say let Africans starve; solve overcrowding this way. I sincerely hope that this outlook comes from having lived a sheltered and protected life with little suffering except that which cannot possibly be avoided. Such an attitude bears witness to either great ignorance on the matter at hand or a great lack of humanity. "
Yup. let them starve.  They keep having these unfortunate kids because they keep getting handouts of food.  No more free food, no more starving people, after a few weeks.  I'm not ignorant on the matter, I just think it shouldn't be my problem.  Call me whatever names you like, I don't want to feed anyone but my own kin, it's not my responsibility. Lack of humanity..that's liberal speak and an attack with no substance.  Send your tax dollars to feed third world kids, I'd rather support someone in my own country if I must be taxed for things for charity.  There is no point in being benevolent in this world. Look what happend in Mog.  Let these animals kill each other off, the strong survive. Our charity has caused an unnatural population growth, with no solution in sight.  One day, there will simply be too many people to feed.  My views will not be so callous then, you can bet people will feed their own first.




"Perhaps if you first hand experienced a child, victim of the circumstances created by adults around him, slowly withering away, drawing his last breath as you watch, perhaps if you experienced this you'd realize that ethnicity, skin colour or place of origin has little to do with the value of human life... blah blah blah"
More sappy liberal speak with no substance except:  you're right about ethnicity... it's moot to me what race these people are, I don't think our country should aid anyone outside our borders that has nothing to offer us in return.  The world is becoming over-populated.. again... because of handouts. Let Darwinism run its course, the human race in the blighted areas will be stronger as a result, more self sufficient...not in need of handouts.


" 'nice war would solve everything', you write. This makes me sure that you're not cold blooded and cynically oriented around your own particular group; it is a statement of true ignorance of the facts on this matter. Wars have so far had a very small impact on population growth or lack thereof. Many were killed during WWII, but the baby boom that followed more than made up for the men and women lost during the conflict. War, while sometimes necessary, is by no means an effective way of controlling population growth."

It would be along with the other steps I'v suggested.


"As has been pointed out (by Muckmaw) I believe, a quick look at history will show that all great empires have failed and either disappeared or lost their power....."

Nothing lasts forever, you make no point.



"Steve, I do not mean to throw trash at you as a person; I am not calling you ignorant. I'm saying that your comments are founded in shallow gut-feelings stemming from the life you've lead so far, and that those gut feelings are a long way from close to reality."

Wrong about shallow gut feelings or the life I've led.  I could sit on a couch here in Phoenix and collect welfare.  I live a comfortable life because I work, no handouts. When I wanted a bigger house, I got a second job for a few months so I could put more loot down.. no handouts. Look, life isn't fair and you need to get over that. I simply don't feel like I should bear the burden for underveloped countries producing children they cannot feed.

"It'll be revealed for you that humanity comes in many different forms and colours, yet it is all the same."

This is the second time you've insinuated my feelings are based on people's ethnicity.  That's more liberal tactics and it pisses me off. I didn't say stop helping a particular race(s).  I said stop helping everyone. Don't do it again, it's rude and misleading.  


"Experience a war first hand..."
 
It's foolish for you to presume I haven't.



 Look, go on about your life being an idealist.  I like to think I'm being pragmatic.. perhaps to the detriment to my "humanity".. but I can live with that.  A time will come in the future when over-population forces others to think as I do.

[StSanta]

Alright Steve, lemme start by apologizing for coming off rather high horsey and aggressively. Due to personal experiences it is an area I feel compassionately about and that sometimes manifests itself in the way I express myself. So read the following knowing I mean no insult to you as an individual.

Stevie wrote:

Yup. let them starve. They keep having these unfortunate kids because they keep getting handouts of food. No more free food, no more starving people, after a few weeks. I'm not ignorant on the matter, I just think it shouldn't be my problem. Call me whatever names you like, I don't want to feed anyone but my own kin, it's not my responsibility. Lack of humanity..that's liberal speak and an attack with no substance

They have those 'unfortunate' kids for a reason - to secure themselves when they get old. And because of their poverty, even if they decided to try birth control they wouldn't be able to buy it. So let us take away the last pleasure they have, sex, and see if life becomes better. What I am saying is that your solution is a bit simplistic and causes needless suffering and future problems - also for your own country.

What do you do - send the people a fish, or a fishing net? I advocate the latter. The West has done very, very little in Africa (compared to what we've gotten and what we have). Just getting rid of the loans they have would make a huge difference -  some nations spend a large part of their BNP just paying interests on those loans - and western countries can afford letting them go. So I ain't talking free food here - I am talking help to self help. I am talking survival.

You're not my kin, so perhaps if I saw you or your loved ones suffering after a car accident, I should just shrug, walk away and yell 'nature in action, not my problem'. Stupid example, but I bet yer relatives (the ones still alive) would be mighty pissed off at me and might cause me problems later on. Certainly, if I keep on behaving like that, sooner or later I am gonna come across some people who'd want to do harm to me because of my inactivity.

I'm a libertarian, not a liberal. I am also a secular humanist, and that is where me calling it lack of humanity stems from. You deliberately decide to consider some humans nothing more than animals only because of geographical location and dismiss all there, suggesting that they're all lazy people who just want handouts. Or rather, that they've bred too much and therefore, like deer in the woods, need to have their numbers regulated. We've seen that attitude in Europe, and we've seen how many millions of dead it left.

Send your tax dollars to feed third world kids, I'd rather support someone in my own country if I must be taxed for things for charity.

Ah don't worry. The US uses 0.11% of its GNP on foreign aid. Denmark uses ten times that. What you essentially is saying is that you'd rather make sure some drug addict can afford a new pair of Nike sneakers and a joint, rather than helping a family of eight survive for a month. Because that druggie is 'your kin'. Or am I misinterpreting it? I hope somehow that given a choice about how your dollars were spent, you'd opt to put it to use where it does most good. But I shouldn't put myself on a piedestal; I bought pizza yesterday. Could have survived on less and given the rest of the money to charity, but I didn't. Mostly because my government already is forcing me to do charity through taxes.

I do not think of your attitude as cynical or realistic - it's more a dismissal as the whole deal not being in your part of the world and therefore not a problem. It's an inefficient attitude fostered by having lived a comparatively sheltered life, probably in a very homogenous, tight knit community. Come from such an environment myself and it did take some nasty experience before my mind decided to think about this rather nasty topic.

There is no point in being benevolent in this world. Look what happend in Mog. Let these animals kill each other off, the strong survive. Our charity has caused an unnatural population growth, with no solution in sight.

Nah, it isn't our charity that has caused population growth - it is industrialization that has done that. We hoard up much grain in the west- much that ultimately is destroyed - in order to drive up the price. This food would amply feed a good deal of the starving people around the world *while people try to find a solution*. Unfortunately it seems many are apathetic to the sufferings of others, and therefore little gets done. We've done so much before - look at how warn torn Europe was rebuilt - because the drive and need to do so was there. It is doable - what we lack is will.

3000 people killed at 9/11. That's a mere fart in space compared to what happened on a single day when hutu's and tutsi's started the genocide. but what the hell do I care about Americans and Arabs anyway? Let them kill each other.

So why do I care? Easy; self preservation and development. The world is not an isolated place, and the US doesn't live in a bubble. Poverty breeds resentment, resentment breeds hatred. And that hatred is directed at the wealthy and the bullies - primarily US and Europe. Furthermore, Africa is a HUGE potential MARKET that could spur economic growth. In economy you don't have 100 dollars and then if one guy gets more, another gets less. It doesn't work that way, which is why new markets are good things. Stuff like that

One day, there will simply be too many people to feed. My views will not be so callous then, you can bet people will feed their own first.

Yes, but what you're doing is throwing an entire loaf of bread to the dogs because you didn't like the colour of it, despite knowing that there were people (not your kin) standing outside your door that hadn't had a bite to eat for a week. We have enough - more than enough. While corruption must be handled by the Africans themselves, there is ****eloads of things the west can do if it gets out of this pitiful apathetic state it is in.

More sappy liberal speak with no substance except: you're right about ethnicity... it's moot to me what race these people are, I don't think our country should aid anyone outside our borders that has nothing to offer us in return. The world is becoming over-populated.. again... because of handouts. Let Darwinism run its course, the human race in the blighted areas will be stronger as a result, more self sufficient...not in need of handouts.

Just saying that in your little protected world, you have yet to experience something that make you go 'uhhhhhhh'. You have yet to see true suffering and pain. Cannot really say it in another way than that; once you see it, you change. If you don't, then you're one cold mofo (which, I think, is much more comfortable overall, but probably less rewarding too)

Strictly speaking I'd not call it Darwinism. More like a short term situation (in evolutionary terms) that can be fixed or at least handled quite well if there just is a little political will. If just the Christians in the west do what they preach, then that problem would be solved.

It would be along with the other steps I'v suggested.

Population growth control through starvation, you mean? And you do not see this as a method that causes excessive suffering when alternatives are available? China managed, through use of a hard hand, to get its population explosion under semi control. I'd say having just one kid beats having eight and then seeing 'em die because rich people don't consider them really human.

[StSanta]

Nothing lasts forever, you make no point.

I do, but you fail to grasp it. The US will fail, too. In a few hundred years, your descendants may be on the verge of starvation. Assuming that attitudes such as your own are prevailing, your genetic heritage will end to a large degree. Your blood will die out in a painful and *unnecessary* way. 'It Could Be You' ain't bull****e - I think about that when I see a videotape of a skydiving accident or other such incidents. It takes so little to change or end a life. Can end today.

Am not talking mere starvation though. Just a general lack of care towards your well being; not even expending an ounce of energy, which would be enough to secure your survival. This can happen. I've seen a video of a chap, in the US, who has a heart attack outside a gas station. There are five people around him; they look at him and then walk/drive away. The man died and police tried in vain to track the 5 down. This is what lack of compassion and care brings; it bites itself in the arse.

Wrong about shallow gut feelings or the life I've led. I could sit on a couch here in Phoenix and collect welfare. I live a comfortable life because I work, no handouts. When I wanted a bigger house, I got a second job for a few months so I could put more loot down.. no handouts. Look, life isn't fair and you need to get over that. I simply don't feel like I should bear the burden for underveloped countries producing children they cannot feed.

So you compare having two jobs to living in an area where people die from AIDS, landmines, rebel/government forces, starvation, where NO JOBS ARE TO BE HAD? They live as best they can. But in a war ravaged economy, they cannot just get a second job and then save up some loot. While I commend your attitude and work ethics and while it certainly is much better than the average person, I don't think you can compare your situation to that of desperately poor Africans struggling to find any job that can feed them for a day.

I'll agree with you that the problem primarily is the Africans themselves - corruption and wars and a culture where superstition and ignorance isn't countered by science. But, in order for there to be progress, there are certain things the west needs to do - such as forgetting about loans that never will be paid anyhow. In the end, it'd be better for us. The environment would be better. The economy would thrive on the new markets. There'd be less refugee/immigrants on welfare in northern European countries etc etc.

Ok, you do not feel you should bear the burden for underdeveloped countries producing children they cannot feed. I  can respect not so much the view, but you as a person despite holding it . Just think it is amazingly selfish that is all, primarily because one percent of what you earn a month would be enough to keep a family alive for the same amount of time. OTOH, I do not support the state forcing people to help others (foreign aid) being a libertarian, yet if done as Denmark has done it, it is economically beneficial for the country giving aid. The way Danes have done it means new contracts, markets and the like - promoting our values, goods and products. That's not handouts - that's intelligence in aiding people.

This is the second time you've insinuated my feelings are based on people's ethnicity. That's more liberal tactics and it pisses me off. I didn't say stop helping a particular race(s). I said stop helping everyone. Don't do it again, it's rude and misleading.

Hm, it was based on your choice of words - 'they are not my kin' Will use a dictionary to illustrate:
'Kin' being defined as: 2. Relatives; persons of the same family or race.

Should I read it just as 'they are not my family'? Otherwise it comes off as racial in nature. Dunno if you've heard calls such as 'go back to your kin white/black/yellow/orange/blue boy!' in yer life before, but I have.

It's foolish for you to presume I haven't.
'
Well, I should have been more clear. Experience it as a civilian living in a war torn country without any form of government assistance to help you live. My apologies for being unclear and not really considering the possibility of you participating in the defense of your nation.

War is dangerous enough if you're in comfy clothes, getting food and is armed and supported. It's even worse if you're a civilian. Recent figures shows that by far the vast majority of people who die in modern wars are civilians.

Look, go on about your life being an idealist. I like to think I'm being pragmatic.. perhaps to the detriment to my "humanity".. but I can live with that. A time will come in the future when over-population forces others to think as I do.

I am a pragmatist. I'm a recovering cynic using idealism to somehow bring a shimmer of hope into the world, and as such I am acutely aware that life is not bliss and love and all the other crap we're told to expect. It's mostly pain and struggles, at least for the majority of people, interspersed with moments of joy.

I just do not consider your view as pragmatic It introduces a lot of extra suffering, it is ineffective, it has directly negative consequences for the west (terrorist attacks, environment). It's not a pragmatic view in any way - what it is is a quick glance around the world followed by what Douglas Adams called SEP - Somebody Elses Problem. SEPs are invisible to people. Essentially, it's betting on number one always and closing your eyes, *hoping* that the suffering won't spill over to your soil, yet preparing to go to war if it does. And this is why I so violently oppose the view you hold.

I mean, you seem like a nice  guy I would enjoy having this discussion over a few beers with. And I can see where you're coming from - as a libertarian, I am very much against government handouts. Yet views such as the one you have presented are ineffective and reactive, rather than proactive. Why did 9/11 happen in the US and not in, say, Japan? Because of poverty->resentment->anger->hatred->fundamentalism->just cause->empowerment through hitting back. Very roughly speaking. It is no coincidence that the majority of the players involved doing the actual dying were from areas of semi-conflict and poverty or at least strongly influenced by perceived slights/opression. I fear ignoring Africa will create a problem that is many times worse than what we're seeing in the Middle East. And the latter is interesting to us simply because of oil - had there been none, then we'd handle it the same way we now handle the African continent.
 
Long post. It's now 11:59 AM and I still haven't slept. Bloody insomnia :/

[Martlet]

In the history of the world, there has never been a nation like the USA.

Predict all you want about our future.   It amounts to crap.