[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] The West is not some World Police, regardless of what you may think.Nibroc420

No, but we definitely owe something to Africa

West deports enough slaves to destabalize African population. West colonizes Africa and forces its people into hard labor. West leaves Africa and draws borders disregarding historical ethnic and political differences. West watches on a Africa self-destructs.

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] Oh, so i guess that means murdering children is ok now? :roll:

Nibroc420

hey, I was agreeing with you. In any case,I find it ironic that at this very moment in another thread you are advocating allowing people in Africa to starve in order to "balance out" the population.

I don't see a difference. People die in both cases, and we have the power to prevent both. Intentions are inconsequential. Is the life of a person intentionally killed more valuable than one who starves to death?

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] All i'm saying is if there's not enough food to go around, a lower population would insure that everyone is well fed, rather than fed just enough to keep them alive but starving.Nibroc420

So we allow millions to die? don't forget that it is the west's fault that Africa is so screwed up. In my opinion, the governments there need complete reorganization and the borders need to be completely re-drawn, but that's never gonna happen.

No, but we definitely owe something to Africa

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] USA: Oops, we murdered 168 children.
Pakastan families : You murdered my children!
US President: Mission Accomplished!

The high number of "casualties" is proof that the US doesn't give a **** about how many children they slaughter. So long as their mission gets completed. We're busy locking people up for life because they'd murdered 1 person, but when 168 die, no-one cares. Unless they're American, if one American dies, it's all over the news, and everyone's all sad.

Nibroc420

It's always been like that. Must I bring up Dresden and Hiroshima? Vietnam?

hey, I was agreeing with you. In any case,I find it ironic that at this very moment in another thread you are advocating allowing people in Africa to starve in order to "balance out" the population.

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] Warfare & Genocide = more food to go around.Nibroc420

So you are trying to back up your points with social darwinism? C'mon, that's the same justification the nazis used.

So we allow millions to die? don't forget that it is the west's fault that Africa is so screwed up. In my opinion, the governments there need complete reorganization and the borders need to be completely re-drawn, but that's never gonna happen.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] The numbers suggest otherwise.
I'll stick with the facts and hard data, rather than your speculation.

Nibroc420

The high number of "casualties" is proof that the US doesn't give a **** about how many children they slaughter. So long as their mission gets completed. We're busy locking people up for life because they'd murdered 1 person, but when 168 die, no-one cares. Unless they're American, if one American dies, it's all over the news, and everyone's all sad.

It's always been like that. Must I bring up Dresden and Hiroshima? Vietnam?

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] If they knew how to fish or farm, they'd have food. If they would have food, we wouldn't have to give them food. Are you suggesting they're fully aware of how to farm and fish, but simply dont? Maybe if we stopped giving them free food, they'd have some incentive to get started?Nibroc420

*facepalm*

They can't farm because of drought and because they are constantly uprooted by warfare and genocide.

So you are trying to back up your points with social darwinism? C'mon, that's the same justification the nazis used.

[QUOTE="Tokugawa77"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] But you're not helping that person. You're a crutch that one day that person will have to do without. Once they no longer have your "help", they'll go back to starving until someone else comes along. Why? Because once they become dependant on you, and they no longer have to learn how to fend for themselves. Stop giving the fisherman fish, just show him how to do it, so he can help himself. By simply giving him food every day, he's not going to become a better fisherman, he's only going to become a better begger.Nibroc420

They aren't starving because they don't know how to fish or farm :roll:

*facepalm*

They can't farm because of drought and because they are constantly uprooted by warfare and genocide. Not to mention that most of them don't own land. It's not as if they can just pick up a hoe and go into some peice of desert and start growing some wheat.

That global warming is a hoax and Obama was born in Indonesia

[QUOTE="Chris_Williams"]

its so easy for you guys to sit infront of your computers and having access to clean water to sit there and judge and say we shouldn't help these people, its way to easy. thats why unless you been there, you can't talk. There are kids over there, starving and the only thing they did was be born in a third war country, they didn't choose to be, they didn't choose to be orphans, or didn't choose to be hungry. It really pisses me off that alot of people in here don't know what the heck their talking about. You want to just watch by as kids starve to death? really?..what did these kids do? why must they suffer? seriously people, we can't help everyone in the world, we can't end world hunger but i rather help 1 person then no one at all.

Nibroc420

They aren't starving because they don't know how to fish or farm :roll: