Curse

ensoriki · Dec 12, 2007, 04:20 AM // 04:20

Im in a mood for entertainment and want a debate >.<
Or at least to read one.
So I have chosen the environment as a topic.
topic can go from anywhere as long as it stays environmental

So the opening question is.

Some countries believe they can go through polluting, because they did not industrialize before. As these countries did not industrialize and make the mistake of polluting earlier, they believe they can do it now, when everyone is trying to patch the mistakes of the past.
Would you see these countries as foolish, or give them leeway.

OI-812 · Dec 12, 2007, 04:32 AM // 04:32

They're fools. But it's not like anyone can stop them. The fact that they haven't become industrialized until now tells me something about the worth of their land/its resources/its people. Bunch of squabbling tribals/religious zealots/anarchists/ethnicities in the middle of a blood feud in a country with little real worth in terms of harvestable, exportable and marketable resources and/or bearing the scars of mankind's ravages (even when there's barely anything to screw up, people will find a way to screw even that little bit up).

Survival of the fittest doesn't stop at the rest of the animal kingdom. Adapt or die. These countries have taken too long to adapt, for whatever reason. If we're cleaning our act up, then quite frankly they should be shut down. Let the ones who have busted their balls for centuries in the name of progress run the show. Migrate to a REAL country/annex yourself to a real country or get rid of the factories/machinery/whatever producing this great amount of pollution and rot in your mud huts and particle-board and corrugated tin ghettos. A lot of the time the only thing holding people back is THEMSELVES.

Shadowmere · Dec 12, 2007, 04:35 AM // 04:35

I see it as foolish, personally, however I also see how it is difficult for them to avoid this, industrialization is very good for a country's economy and overall well-being. Thing is effecient clean technology is for the most part years ahead of them or simply too expensive to impliment. I think perhaps there should be incentives given of some sort to try to get these industrializing countries to industrialize in a cleaner way. Don't ask me how to do that though I'm no polotician :P

ensoriki · Dec 12, 2007, 04:39 AM // 04:39

People look back on their history, hence the phrase, learn from your past.
These countries don't have a past to learn from and feel because of that they are at liberty to create it now.
Considering the state of the world and how modernization has wrought many problems. It would indeed be considered foolish to let them continue.
However, how do you stop them? It would seem foolish to many people to attack a country for industrializing. Negotiations don't happen if a country is stubborn.
The best way for them to learn, just might be to let them make their bed and sleep in it.

The emissions from these country's will easily add up to stronger potency in pollution in any surrounding areas, and perhaps slow down change. Another thing is how do you take action against countries that have already said they wish to continue.

OI-812 · Dec 12, 2007, 04:42 AM // 04:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

The best way for them to learn, just might be to let them make their bed and sleep in it.

That's all well and good, but on Planet Earth we're all pretty much in the same bed, and quite frankly we don't need industrial infants wetting the damn bed. Bad enough for the planet that we have our own crap to deal with.

ensoriki · Dec 12, 2007, 04:50 AM // 04:50

The industry boom took off near the wars. As no large scale wars are taking place ,we are already seeing industrialization go into a decline, as those countries industry rises they will quicken their haste to catch up to the rest of the world and possibly leave industrialization faster than we did.

Onarik Amrak · Dec 12, 2007, 04:51 AM // 04:51

They're fools. They're looking out for their own economy in the short term and not heeding possible consequences in the near to far future.

On the other hand, you have the Nordic countries leaping for joy due to thawing lands meaning more economical mining operations.

ensoriki · Dec 12, 2007, 05:00 AM // 05:00

Ah the consequences of the future.
Bring to light the consequences, you believe.
Melting ice caps? Warming earth?

wetsparks · Dec 12, 2007, 05:06 AM // 05:06

Seeing as the US (minus California) is the leading polluter, followed closely by California, followed by China (who is gaining fast), I think these two countries need to get their shit together first before anyone can complain about what some African country is doing. (And I'm American)
Unfortunately the oil companies have strong ties in the white house and shit won't get done until Bush leaves. Even then the oil companies have enough influence that it will take along time and gas costing $5 a gallon before people really push towards hybrids and alternative fueled cars.
In other words, the environment is screwed. Coastal people, learn to swim REAL good.

OI-812 · Dec 12, 2007, 05:12 AM // 05:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

Melting ice caps? Warming earth?

Possibly. Happening as we speak, if you subscribe to Al Gore's view of the situation.

To some extent global "warmings" and "coolings" or "dimmings" are part of a natural cycle. I've heard it said that we think far too highly of ourselves when we say that we could be causing significant damage to an ecosystem that has been functioning for billions of years, and has gone through plenty of change without our help. Personally, I think it's irresponsible to assume that there's no way we could really be doing any significant damage, but I also think it's patently absurd to assume that we're COMPLETELY responsible for the changes the planet is undergoing. This planet has been doing an ecological dance for some time now, and we only very recently in the scale of things cut in. We're fools if we think we can actually stop and/or reverse some of the stuff that's happening - that would be like trying to wrest control of a bus' steering wheel from a Olympic weightlifter. We can kind of "nudge" it subtly to make it take a slightly more favorable course, but nature's at the wheel, and she isn't going to ride shotgun with US at the wheel. It would be like putting a 8-month old in the driver's seat.

ensoriki · Dec 12, 2007, 05:13 AM // 05:13

We may have about 5-50 years before global warming really hits us hard however, enough time for the countries to go through with their crap and then end it.

quickmonty · Dec 12, 2007, 03:09 PM // 15:09

We also have to figure out how to save Mars. Their ice caps are melting too! Damned Martian industrialists.

elektra_lucia · Dec 12, 2007, 03:13 PM // 15:13

I see all countries as foolish in some way or another.

Onarik Amrak · Dec 12, 2007, 06:00 PM // 18:00

Not all of it is about warming.

Take the Three Gorges Dam for example.

China pumps a huge amount of pollution and waste into that river.

In the past it's not a big deal for them because of how voluminous the river is.

However, now that it's dammed the flow is severely reduced, but they still pump out similar levels of pollution.

That pollution isn't being washed out to sea at the same rate, which means the pollution level is going to build up.

What happens next is anyone's guess...

OI-812 · Dec 12, 2007, 06:22 PM // 18:22

Pssh, good luck getting China to clean up their act. They're notorious for resisting outside influence and thumbing their noses at the rest of the world. Getting them to reduce the pollution they crank out is going to be only slightly more easy than getting them to improve their human rights policies (something WE need to work on at home, thanks to a moron president/executive branch and a bunch of morons elsewhere in the legislative and judicial branches deciding the "Patriot" Act was a good idea. Until we do that, getting China to shape up on human rights may be awkward... but no matter how clean we try to get (we still have a LOT of work to do in that area) you can pretty much count on China dragging its heels.

Onarik Amrak · Dec 12, 2007, 06:27 PM // 18:27

Australia finally signed the Kyoto Protocol.

The last prime minister was America's bitch for the last 10 years.

Finally have a change in government.

elektra_lucia · Dec 12, 2007, 06:41 PM // 18:41

UK accounts for 2% of the worlds pollution apparently, I think we do our bit to help but it won't have any effect to help. America and China are the biggest causes of pollution problems.

ensoriki · Dec 12, 2007, 07:46 PM // 19:46

Many countries go under the radar.
Canada isn't so clean as it makes itself out to be.
Toronto is smog village.

wetsparks · Dec 12, 2007, 08:18 PM // 20:18

Canada cuts down thousands of trees because the soil is enriched with oil particles. They pollute to get oil that pollutes and cuts down trees that clean the air.

Onarik Amrak · Dec 12, 2007, 09:14 PM // 21:14

Canada's a huge country so it's hard to generalise.

Having a low population density usually helps the numbers.

Toronto wasn't that smoggy when I was there.

If you think that's bad you haven't been to Beijing... or even Kuala Lumpur...

One thing Canada has going for it is the huge amount of fresh water.

Funny thing about the dam systems in Northern Quebec.

Sure it's clean energy now... but when they built it they displaced many Inuit and Cree settlements, flooded their hunting grounds, cut off a huge percentage of the water flowing to downstream villages AND leeched mercury into the waterways. How's that for progress? Solved the economy crisis at the time though...