 |
| |
|
|
DarkCloud
|
 |
of Lists
Jul 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chris 62
More kid stuff in this thread.
Quite simple: You ally with the OBL boys, you are our enemy, and we will f*ck you any way we can.
I'll shed a tear for Somalia when they start behaving like a civilized nation, instead of one that drags dead men through the streets while laughing and singing.
They danced with the devil, now they got their asses burned.
To damn bad.
For them. |
um... this is the problem that most people have with america- the fact that some people don't really want to investigate other cultures and change them.
There is the fact that america should behave reasonably and not use this as an excuse to beat up its old enemies.
I really don't care much if civilians are injured if there is a purpose- but fabricating evidence and such really ticks me off- I hate people who lie.
The question is, Chris, is the more important thing killing people who may or may not have done somthing wrong- or waiting a month or so and finding out the truth- I would be for a full examination of the system- but if nothing is found in 1-2 weeks, parts of the system should be allowed to once again function.
quote:
What would the third world do without the west? It would be even poorer than now. About $300 billion is transfered annually from the West to poorer countries. Now that's a huge amount of money and I don't think West can possibly be expected to do any more.
|
I agree with Roman here- America and 'rich' countries continuously fund the 'lesser' nations- my thought is let them die off- who really cares about a lesser nation- if they can get together, let them, and if they are a threat to the world- destroy them- but let them govern themselves the way they want to.
quote:
there are other much smaller companies providing remittance services but Al-Barakaat also is the biggest post and telecom company so there will still be a serious disruption. Just as serious is that those companies, like Al-Bakaraat, use the informal hawalad banking system, on which the US is cracking down because they suspect it is abused to finance Al-Qaeda. So if a company wants to start providing the same services, it can’t use the hawala system if it wants to stay out of trouble but the problem that a lot of people simply cannot afford anything beyond the hawala system. (eg, money transfers to Pakistan costs 15% commission if you use an official service, but only 1-2% with hawala) |
Colon- allow the US time to investigate the system- a one week disruption couldn't really hurt Somalia much- the only people it would hurt are the quarreling and embezzling oil overlords. And even then, there are other channels open to them. 1-2 weeks is good. 3-4 is questionable. 2 months is unacceptable unless something is found.
And, in the end, if nothing is found, reparations are due.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Stefan Härtel
|
 |
Eddie's best friend
Jul 1999
time: 06:16
|
|
quote:
Mark- if it wasn't for the west- they would likely still be primitive tribes in most of Africa- (exceptions: ethiopia,
Egypt, Saudi Arabia*possibly) |
Question to you Dark Cloud: Would you be happier if you were to live under the rule of a foreign culture, that pressed it's ideals of culture and civilization on you, making you believe this is the right way to live, and, when they would finally go, you were left with a halfways urbanized society, which didn't really make you happy and brought you more disadvantages than good? And if they finally left, you found yourself in a country that has many different people lumped together with the only thing uniting them the ruler-drawn frontiers of the former empire?
Or would you rather be happy to live in a society in which you would still lead a sometimes difficult yet simple life, peaceful and prosperous in so many areas? Without anyone interfering in your civilization and ideals just because they don't match with theirs? And without conflicts that needn't be there (of course there were wars in pre-colonial Africa, but not as widespread as today)?
And one final question: If you lived your whole life in the deep jungles of Africa, without knowing the modern western society, and without having serious contact to anybody who represents it, how do you know, and how do you care if your culture was primitive?
(And another question, since when is Saudi-Arabia in Africa?  :rolleyes
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
DarkCloud
|
|
of Lists
Jul 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Stefan Härtel
quote:
Mark- if it wasn't for the west- they would likely still be primitive tribes in most of Africa- (exceptions: ethiopia,
Egypt, Saudi Arabia*possibly) |
Question to you Dark Cloud: Would you be happier if you were to live under the rule of a foreign culture, that pressed it's ideals of culture and civilization on you, |
That is precisely what I was against- that is why I am against intervention in any way- aid or war. But they owe the west money- thus they need to pay. The west helped them get where they are- and they seem to want to 'civilize' more... Right now they are but a feudal Europe without the castles.
quote:
m
aking you believe this is the right way to live, and, when they would finally go, you were left with a halfways urbanized society, which didn't really make you happy and brought you more disadvantages than good? And if they finally left, you found yourself in a country that has many different people lumped together with the only thing uniting them the ruler-drawn frontiers of the former empire? |
The problem here is mob mentality- they hate the people their grandparents hated (still a problem in europe; but moreso because they are in the same country) if they could but conquer that, they wouldn't have a problem=- thus they caused it themselves and they have been thrown into the fire to correct it.
quote:
Or would you rather be happy to live in a society in which you would still lead a sometimes difficult yet simple life, peaceful and prosperous in so many areas? Without anyone interfering in your civilization and ideals just because they don't match with theirs? And without conflicts that needn't be there (of course there were wars in pre-colonial Africa, but not as widespread as today)?
And one final question: If you lived your whole life in the deep jungles of Africa, without knowing the modern western society, and without having serious contact to anybody who represents it, how do you know, and how do you care if your culture was primitive?
|
You wouldn't know the difference, I agree- but the way to civilization is better- they may not have known the difference- but would you rather go to the bathroom on the ground or in a toilet?
I would say that civilization is, ultimately, good for a people.
Without civilization- even more africans would die from aids, other diseases etc. Then again you could say that diseases weed out the weak, but take it as you like.
quote:
(And another question, since when is Saudi-Arabia in Africa? :rolleyes |
Also, Saudi Arabia is close, it is in the Middle East, a subcontinent of Asia, but it is also bordering Africa, thus my classification.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Roman
|
 |
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by faded glory
Why did European Civilization rise to control the world? Why not the new world civilizations? (Maya, Aztec's). Or Africa's...or even China.... was there somthing in our blood that motivated us more?
This is somthing ive always wandered. |
That is a question to which there is no simple answer. Obviously, there have been other civilizations throughout history that were much more advanced than Europe in terms of science and technology.
For example:-
In 13th century CE China was on the verge of industrialization. The Chinese had developed paper currency, credit and rudimentary banking. These economic developments fostered technological innovation on an unprecedented scale. The Chinese already had the compass, paper and plenty of other technology that was extremely advanced at the time, including multiple mast ships, which were three times larger than Columbus' Santa Maria. China used the ships to explore and reached as far as India and East Africa, where the Chinese had set up trading ports and beginnings of colonies.
The population of Sung China was already large and suprisingly urbanised - 26 Chinese cities at this time exceeded the population of 500,000; 10 cities exceeded 1,000,000 and the capital Hangzhou had more than 2,000,000 inhabitants. The population was increasing rapidly, but the Chinese developed selective breeding and used it to make strains of rice with yields so high that they actually had a surpluss of food - the first civilization in history to achieve this.
China also produced steel and that on such a scale that it wasn't until Britain industrialized in the 19th century that this was overtaken by any other country. There was also labour intensive silk production taking place, which could quite easily have been automated had China developed steam power. In fact, China was on the verge of discovering steam power.
Historians call this Chinese accomplishment proto-industrialization and full blown industrialization would surely have followed (500 years before that in Europe) had it not been for the Mongol invasion, the concurrent spread of Black Death and the subsequent Chinese isolationism.
Last edited by Roman on 28-11-2001 at 02:47
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Stefan Härtel
|
|
Eddie's best friend
Jul 1999
time: 06:16
|
|
It's simple. Europe never provided the mass of soil and ressources for greater number of people to flourish. By the end of the middle ages, Europe was entirely explored, with only the lesser interesting areas of Russia left open. Think about it, if Europe wouldn't have settled their people down in America, there'd be a couple of tens of millions, or even hundreds of millions of people more in Europe. It'd be a chaotic mess.
China is sort of different. It always provided more room for it's people. Yes, there have always been more people in China than anywhere else in the world, but China is also a hell of a lot bigger than other countries.
And why didn't Europe take the east? Simple. Russia was a large barrier; icy cold, unusual, unfriendly and uninteresting to most Europeans. And the other option would be southwards, through Turkish and Muslimic territories. And that would most definately have been the end of Europe.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Colon
|
 |
Antwerp, Colon's Chocolate Canard Country
Jan 1970
time: 06:16
|
|
Dan, first of all, you seem to keep forgetting this isn’t just about Al-Barakat, it’s about the country in which the firm is situated and their role in ensuring income to the country.
Secondly, does Saudi Arabia’s and Pakistan’s cooperation compensate for the fact there wouldn’t be a Taliban without Pakistan’s support as there wouldn’t be an Al-Qaeda without Saudi Arabia support? Who plays with fire... right?
Yet I’m happy to concede that SA and Pakistan have been cooperative to the extend of risking domestic stability and it wouldn’t be very wise to crack down on them. It’s just that Bush’s administration apparently didn’t felt much for making such considerations in Somalia. If you’re going to be principled then at least be principled all the time.
Last edited by Colon on 28-11-2001 at 18:45
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-11-2001 02:45
|