Skip Navigation

iraqi civilian deaths

Travel Forums Off Topic iraqi civilian deaths

Page

Last Post

11. Posted by IronChef (Full Member 1076 posts) 11y

Quoting Brendan

Quoting tway

It's as if the loss of 1 person in the West is equal to the loss of 2,000 people from developing countries. Strange math indeed.

I agree with that completly. It is nothing compared the tsunami of December. And in relation to that - more people were horrified with the deaths of the tsunami then all of the deaths in the Iraq War Part 2.

Brendan - its all in the way the media cover it. If they want to put a sad angle on it or show it for something else. Of course, they didn't put that into the coverage of the war with Iraq. They want people to support it. Not be outraged.

12. Posted by ukmassage (Inactive 1052 posts) 11y

the ultimate solution to war is not more armies, countries and governments to rule over the people - but no armies, no coutries and no governments.

Just a global community of citisens running their afairs in a democratic way for the benefit of all.

a radical solution to problems which can't be ever solved any other way

13. Posted by Peter (Admin 5789 posts) 11y

If there were no governments, who would be in charge of building roads? Who would make sure rapists, murderers and thiefs are dealt with appropriately? And if there were no countries, who would have any claim over natural resources? What would stop Japanese whalers from killing whales in Australia? Or Australian mining companies from mining uranium in on Mount Fuji (not saying they have any, but you get the idea)? Corporations would replace countries in an instant and without any governance to make sure they behave themselves, the world would be a far worse place.

No armies? That I can agree with. Sadly, I don't see anyone getting rid of their armies any time soon..

14. Posted by daveh (Travel Guru 1027 posts) 11y

Quoting MASSAGEUK

the ultimate solution to war is not more armies, countries and governments to rule over the people - but no armies, no coutries and no governments.

Just a global community of citisens running their afairs in a democratic way for the benefit of all.

a radical solution to problems which can't be ever solved any other way

Also, if there were no countries, how would i be able to manage my photo gallery on TP??? Animal Farm is a book worth reading if you think this is the way ahead.

15. Posted by ukmassage (Inactive 1052 posts) 11y

communities organised on a local, regional, continent and global level would manage all their affairs through informed discussion and voting system.

Workers who do have knowledge and skills do build roads - not governments. And the work will be done more efficiently - without interference of corrupted authorities.

In a more just, participating and caring society there won't be as many derailed individuals as we come accross nowdays. A lot of problematic characters will have proper medical/psychiatric care before committing a crime - financial constrictions won't play a role.

Natural earth resources do belong to humanity as a whole and should be shared by all - not only by a priviledged few who happen to live on that particular land or who happen to have bigger guns to rob these resources.

The radical change means no production for profit but for human use - so turning over all economic mechanism which we use now.

16. Posted by ukmassage (Inactive 1052 posts) 11y

another 500 in Baghdad to the toll - they run over the bridge and drown after a rumour over a suicide bomber in a mosque where they were praying.

I say dangerous places those places of cult

17. Posted by Peter (Admin 5789 posts) 11y

Quoting MASSAGEUK

communities organised on a local, regional, continent and global level would manage all their affairs through informed discussion and voting system.

Doesn't sound much different to the current system.

Natural earth resources do belong to humanity as a whole and should be shared by all - not only by a priviledged few who happen to live on that particular land or who happen to have bigger guns to rob these resources.

Sure, I agree with that. But without some body (a government, organisation or whatever you want to call it) to protect that resource, it would be fair game for anyone. And if I consider that that resource should be preserved and another perons thinks that that resource should be plundered, who gets the right of way? Would you suggest that every time someone wants to chop down a tree, the entire community would turn out to vote? And with humans being humans, I could only imagine that the person suggesting to chop it down would win after offering a small majority of voters some firewood as a 'reward'. Without arms or governments, physical ability would decide any disagreement.

Furthermore, if there were no government to look after disadvantaged citizens, do you really expect the population to voluntarily take care of them? After a community 'vote', they may in fact decide it is better to exterminate those who are using too many resources (eating too much, requiring too much attention, etc..). And who would be able to stop them?

You're an idealist MassageUK, I admire you for that, but it makes no sense

18. Posted by Isadora (Travel Guru 13926 posts) 11y

Quoting MASSAGEUK

communities organised on a local, regional, continent and global level would manage all their affairs through informed discussion and voting system.

Workers who do have knowledge and skills do build roads - not governments. And the work will be done more efficiently - without interference of corrupted authorities.

A Utopian global society would be a wonderful idea!! With that said, your first statement on communities managing their own affairs through discussion and voting is exactly how governments begin. The founding of the US is a prime example of such a process. It is also the nature of the beast, so to speak, the primal need for organization and leadership. Someone is always going to want someone else to lead and/or follow.

Granted, governments are not needed to build roads, or buildings, or anything else. But, unless you eliminate money all together, these endeavors are still going to need to be funded. Are they corporate-sponsored? What keeps the corporation from deciding they should control it's use since they funded the project. If monetary exchange has been eliminated, how are the workers paid? What would motivate someone to build that road - the priviledge of using it? Would that be sufficient?

Pete also has a good point - who will take care of the disadvantaged? Does it come down to "survival of the fittest"? And, who becomes the Robin Hood of this scenario - distributing the wealth equally? I did not mean for that to sound flippant because it is a serious issue, but the disolution of governments would throw the world into global chaos. And then someone will decide that some type of order needs to replace the chaos, a governing body will begin to form... Oops - here we are back at square one...

19. Posted by tway (Travel Guru 7273 posts) 11y

Quoting IronChef

I am sure that we are all considering the context in which things are said or quoted. I haven't looked into the quote from the Biloxi Mayor but I am sure that any human life is precious.

Yes - most definitely. I didn't mean to say that any loss of life was more tragic than another. The point I wanted to make was that we, in the West, don't seem to understand the scale of things. One hundred thousand people died in the tsunami - can we even begin to fathom that number? Can we imagine the reaction had 100,000 people been killed in the hurricane?

It's almost an insult to compare the two - although every, single life lost in each remains a tragedy. I'm sure the mayor was speaking of the devastation he saw before him - and it must be a terrible sight to see. But the media this morning are picking up and running with that quote and suddenly a tsunami in the South and a hurricane in the North are on par with one another. And they're not. The tsunami killed 1,000 times more people, without warning, in some of the poorest countries in the world that have no health coverage, insurance, or means to rebuild on their own.

Six thousand people die EVERY DAY in Africa from preventable diseases. It doesn't even make the news anymore. "Expendible" people don't sell.

20. Posted by Cupcake (Travel Guru 8468 posts) 11y

I am with Tina on this, I was offened when I heard the mayors quote. "This is our tsunami" Yeah, 100,000 plus people dead with NO warning vs. 55 dead with 3 days warning....and if you really want tolook at the big picture...100,000 plus...didn't put a dent in the worlds population....I have yet to find an unbiased news source. I just try to gather as much info as I can, and weed through the bs.....