 |
| |
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:36
|
|
Yes, and? Management assumes someone takes responsiblity and has some sort of plan. Ramdom people going about extracting form the land as they will is not 'management'.
quote:
So this is why all developed nations are deserts, and it's good that China is robbing water from and damaging the environment of its neighbors. You must love the US, if you support this. |
 What a random assed comment. Not funny haha, just funny 
The first statement is just, well, dumb. IN Panama I went one time to an area that due to human activity is becoming a desert. That little desert patch is growing. Does not make the country a desert.
I have made no mention of the "morality" of China's damn buinding spree- but sadly, this behavior is nothing new, specially when you have multinational rivers. Heck, Mexico does not really get much water from the Colorado River anymore- and Turkey has significant control over the water resources of its downstream neighbors, Syria and Iraq. If situations were reversed, this would still happen- anyone with significant hydroeletric potential and raging power needs will look to damns as a simple solution. I am sure if fusion came online tommorrow the damn building would end- but that ain't going to happen, so China weill continue feedings its growing energye needs from damns and dirty coal.
Wow, shows just how evil and terrible the Chinese really are
 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DaShi
|
 |
The Taste of Japan
Sep 2000
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Yes, and? Management assumes someone takes responsiblity and has some sort of plan. Ramdom people going about extracting form the land as they will is not 'management'.
|
That the government controls all the land and dictates what is to be done there. There is responsibility.
quote:
What a random assed comment. Not funny haha, just funny
The first statement is just, well, dumb. IN Panama I went one time to an area that due to human activity is becoming a desert. That little desert patch is growing. Does not make the country a desert. |
This is not a little patch, nor is it your summer trip to Panama. This is not an accurate comparison.
quote:
I have made no mention of the "morality" of China's damn buinding spree- but sadly, this behavior is nothing new, specially when you have multinational rivers. Heck, Mexico does not really get much water from the Colorado River anymore- and Turkey has significant control over the water resources of its downstream neighbors, Syria and Iraq. If situations were reversed, this would still happen- anyone with significant hydroeletric potential and raging power needs will look to damns as a simple solution. I am sure if fusion came online tommorrow the damn building would end- but that ain't going to happen, so China weill continue feedings its growing energye needs from damns and dirty coal.
Wow, shows just how evil and terrible the Chinese really are
|
This thread is about morality and responsibility. Do you think the US does not reap what it sows? How quick some people are to defend the plight of others oppressed by US or even Israeli policy, yet when certain other powerful nations are exploiting and hurting weaker nations, they simply want to discuss which dams work better or justify it. I suppose, if China summarily executed a large number of it's population to reduce a dependence on foreign resources, you would say it is understandable. Or if they rolled over a weaker neighbor to better exploit them, then they are developing so it's ok.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DaShi
That the government controls all the land and dictates what is to be done there. There is responsibility. |
Of course, the party has tens of millions of policement in every inch of the country, and has total control over what every single person in China does, all the time. This si why there is no crime in China, why all its regulations are followed to a T...Oh, wait. NO. That would be an absurdity.
quote:
This is not a little patch, nor is it your summer trip to Panama. This is not an accurate comparison. |
First, it wasn't a summer trip, second, its a perfect comparison- desertification happens world-wide, and the reasons are similar in all the places it occurs. In fact, according to this map:http://www.fao.org/desertification/default.asp?lang=en
Panama is a perfect example of land being damaged, as well as serious deforestation, and all the environmental ills you speak of. And someohow, the government has all these rules on the books, but you know what? Those rules don;t make it.
By the way, ahev YOU ever been anywhere suffering from desertification?
quote:
This thread is about morality and responsibility. Do you think the US does not reap what it sows? How quick some people are to defend the plight of others oppressed by US or even Israeli policy, yet when certain other powerful nations are exploiting and hurting weaker nations, they simply want to discuss which dams work better or justify it. I suppose, if China summarily executed a large number of it's population to reduce a dependence on foreign resources, you would say it is understandable. Or if they rolled over a weaker neighbor to better exploit them, then they are developing so it's ok. |
:yawn:
Oh yes, building damns is the same as mass executions, or general popular oppression- have you joined some eco-terrorist group lately? Cause that is what you sound like, well, expect for the gratuitous "OMG, YOU ANTI-AMERICAN!!" rightwing rant.
States build damns on their territories to use the resources that flow throught them- its called soverignty and it is the basis of the current world order. China, India, Brazil, Turkey, Indonesia-they cut their forests down, they damn their rivers, they use dirty fuels, and all of it to gain economic growth. You know what? The US and Russia and many others did it before them. That ios what happens.
Its cheap and easy to get into a self-induced moralisitc frenzy. Its also useless. UNless you have an answer to China's or the rest of the developing world's energy needs, or happen to have a few undred billion dollars in your piggy bank to help build clean gas plants and the infrastructure to supply them, then what do you offer, besides spitle?
OH, and by the way: did you support Kyoto? Do you support significant environmental regulations on private businesses and such?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DaShi
|
|
The Taste of Japan
Sep 2000
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Of course, the party has tens of millions of policement in every inch of the country, and has total control over what every single person in China does, all the time. This si why there is no crime in China, why all its regulations are followed to a T...Oh, wait. NO. That would be an absurdity. |
The government does have a say in what happens to the land. It determines what is farmland and what isn't. Therefore, it has responsbility. But I said that before. Never did mention individual people. Where did that come from?
quote:
First, it wasn't a summer trip, second, its a perfect comparison- desertification happens world-wide, and the reasons are similar in all the places it occurs. In fact, according to this map:http://www.fao.org/desertification/default.asp?lang=en
Panama is a perfect example of land being damaged, as well as serious deforestation, and all the environmental ills you speak of. And someohow, the government has all these rules on the books, but you know what? Those rules don;t make it. |
How is the same in method and scale? The Sahara was once not a desert. Does it apply equally as well?
quote:
By the way, ahev YOU ever been anywhere suffering from desertification? |
And it's irrelevant to the arguement, thus I don't mention it.
quote:
:yawn:
Oh yes, building damns is the same as mass executions, or general popular oppression- have you joined some eco-terrorist group lately? Cause that is what you sound like, well, expect for the gratuitous "OMG, YOU ANTI-AMERICAN!!" rightwing rant.
States build damns on their territories to use the resources that flow throught them- its called soverignty and it is the basis of the current world order. China, India, Brazil, Turkey, Indonesia-they cut their forests down, they damn their rivers, they use dirty fuels, and all of it to gain economic growth. You know what? The US and Russia and many others did it before them. That ios what happens. |
So when does it stop? And which developing countries should we favor over others? Is America justified in its actions? It may be developed, but it could develop some more and why should their be restrictions on that? Shouldn't it also have every opportunity to maintain its development?
Otherwise, it's a you're screwed, deal with it approach. I guess you can apply that to Iraq as well. What can they do about it? No one cares what happens to them.
quote:
Its cheap and easy to get into a self-induced moralisitc frenzy. Its also useless. UNless you have an answer to China's or the rest of the developing world's energy needs, or happen to have a few undred billion dollars in your piggy bank to help build clean gas plants and the infrastructure to supply them, then what do you offer, besides spitle? |
I do have a solution to China's energy needs. Slow down growth in certain areas. Invest in better energy program, rather than polluting factories. Deal with poverty, instead of outerspace. It might not catch up to the US as quickly as its wants, but it can spend its money on building a better infrastructure for when it does. Unless you truly believe that there is only one way to do things.
quote:
OH, and by the way: did you support Kyoto? Do you support significant environmental regulations on private businesses and such? |
I support fair treatment. 
Last edited by DaShi on 20-03-2005 at 14:11
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Che - minor error. Actually Mexico is getting more than it's share, however they defined that so many years ago, or Rio Grande water. They are quite happy with it now. Turns out the amounts were set during a wet period, and now that it's dry Mexico's amount is still unchanged. So the US is going to take a major hit, which is having repercussions all through the American SW. That's what happens when poliiticians instead of climatologists and lawyers (i.e. good provisional clauses) write the treaties.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DaShi
The government does have a say in what happens to the land. It determines what is farmland and what isn't. Therefore, it has responsbility. But I said that before. Never did mention individual people. Where did that come from? |
Governments have laws, but laws are broken, and corruption is rampant. If you see land use corruption in the richest and most advanced states, it should not be a surprise nor a shock that such corruption be rampant in devopling states with weak legal systems. Your individual peasant farmer, if they can suplant their income with some illegal wood harvesting, will do it, becuase their concern for the environment is far bellow that of thier concenr for their income.
quote:
How is the same in method and scale? The Sahara was once not a desert. Does it apply equally as well? |
The Sahara being a desert is a natural phenomenon- gradual change over millenia. What you see in China, Panama, and in the Sahel region thought is the result of bad farming practices that deposit way too much salt in the ground. The mehotd is universal- use the same unsustainable farming practices anywhere and you create a salty mess were there once was soil. Certainly scale is not the same, but that's irrelevant to the causes and process being the same.
quote:
So when does it stop? And which developing countries should we favor over others? Is America justified in its actions? It may be developed, but it could develop some more and why should their be restrictions on that? Shouldn't it also have every opportunity to maintain its development? |
States have the right to exploit those natural resources that happen to be in their territory, and this included harnessing hydro-eletric potential. Is it fair to those downstream? Of course not, but its totally legal, just as it mayb e unfair and selfish for one land owner to install a nuicense in thier property that negatively affect their neighbors. Unless we institute some sort of global environmental standard and a means to enforce it, there is nothing that can be done, and it would be hypocratical for a third party to take sides in disuptes over water, specially since any third party out there either has done the same, or would do the same if they could.
I have no problem with setting up some grand group of global environmental enforceable regulations, but that ain't going to happen.
quote:
Otherwise, it's a you're screwed, deal with it approach. I guess you can apply that to Iraq as well. What can they do about it? No one cares what happens to them. |
Not really. People and states are selfish. Turkey needs electricitiy and wants water for its farmers. They happen to control the headwaters of the Euphrates and Tigris. So they exploit it. That Syria and Iraq lose out unfortuntately might be caused by Turkey, but Turkey bears no responsiblity, nor is there any legal way for either Syria of Iraq to complain. Think it unfair? Fine. Go out there and demand the end of the soverign state system. Heck, I'll send you a small donation once you set up.
quote:
I do have a solution to China's energy needs. Slow down growth in certain areas. Invest in better energy program, rather than polluting factories. Deal with poverty, instead of outerspace. It might not catch up to the US as quickly as its wants, but it can spend its money on building a better infrastructure for when it does. Unless you truly believe that there is only one way to do things. |
You are asking them (and by extension other developing coutries) to play by new rules that those that are already rich never followed. The basic question becomes, why should they? Why shopuld those that are poor today pay any more attention to the planet that those who are now rich did when getting there?
If rich states are willing to finance the new rules, great, lets do so. BUt its untenable to demand the poor today to follow a whole new set of rules and mores designed by the rich, who themselves never followed them.
quote:
I support fair treatment. |
Really? What is fair about asking the developing world to follow rules the developed world never did?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DaShi
|
|
The Taste of Japan
Sep 2000
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Governments have laws, but laws are broken, and corruption is rampant. If you see land use corruption in the richest and most advanced states, it should not be a surprise nor a shock that such corruption be rampant in devopling states with weak legal systems. Your individual peasant farmer, if they can suplant their income with some illegal wood harvesting, will do it, becuase their concern for the environment is far bellow that of thier concenr for their income. |
My prior statements still apply.
quote:
The Sahara being a desert is a natural phenomenon- gradual change over millenia. What you see in China, Panama, and in the Sahel region thought is the result of bad farming practices that deposit way too much salt in the ground. The mehotd is universal- use the same unsustainable farming practices anywhere and you create a salty mess were there once was soil. Certainly scale is not the same, but that's irrelevant to the causes and process being the same. |
Scale isn't irrelevant when it begins affecting neighbors. It can't be ignored.
quote:
States have the right to exploit those natural resources that happen to be in their territory, and this included harnessing hydro-eletric potential. Is it fair to those downstream? Of course not, but its totally legal, just as it mayb e unfair and selfish for one land owner to install a nuicense in thier property that negatively affect their neighbors. Unless we institute some sort of global environmental standard and a means to enforce it, there is nothing that can be done, and it would be hypocratical for a third party to take sides in disuptes over water, specially since any third party out there either has done the same, or would do the same if they could.
I have no problem with setting up some grand group of global environmental enforceable regulations, but that ain't going to happen.
Not really. People and states are selfish. Turkey needs electricitiy and wants water for its farmers. They happen to control the headwaters of the Euphrates and Tigris. So they exploit it. That Syria and Iraq lose out unfortuntately might be caused by Turkey, but Turkey bears no responsiblity, nor is there any legal way for either Syria of Iraq to complain. Think it unfair? Fine. Go out there and demand the end of the soverign state system. Heck, I'll send you a small donation once you set up. |
Then this article is a good example to cite in support of one. Of course, there are region banks and other such organizations such as the World Bank to help combat this, but as the article mentions they are susceptle to corruption.
quote:
You are asking them (and by extension other developing coutries) to play by new rules that those that are already rich never followed. The basic question becomes, why should they? Why shopuld those that are poor today pay any more attention to the planet that those who are now rich did when getting there? |
Actually, I'm asking them to run a smarter system that fairer to other developing nations. Just less greedy.
quote:
If rich states are willing to finance the new rules, great, lets do so. BUt its untenable to demand the poor today to follow a whole new set of rules and mores designed by the rich, who themselves never followed them.
Really? What is fair about asking the developing world to follow rules the developed world never did? |
So we can let the Japanese off for their invasion of and atrocities in China, because they didn't have a chance to do it during European colonialization, when it was ok.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DaShi
Scale isn't irrelevant when it begins affecting neighbors. It can't be ignored. |
Nor should the problem be ignored- I doubt it is. BUt I doubt the resources to combat it are available either.
quote:
Actually, I'm asking them to run a smarter system that fairer to other developing nations. Just less greedy. |
Which is fine and dandy but ain;t going to happen, because people will not voluntarily do things to limit thier potential for the goodness of others, unless they might get compensated, and money for such things is not there.
quote:
So we can let the Japanese off for their invasion of and atrocities in China, because they didn't have a chance to do it during European colonialization, when it was ok. |
These comparisons are invalid- desertification and mass murder are not comparable, nor do building damns equate to mass murder.
And yes, precedent matters- developed nations did not begin to clean up their act until they had the resources to do so. Developing state won;t either until either until they get the resources, either as a result of their own growth, or get them from the outside.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-03-2005 11:47
|