There are a great many issues surrounding global warming that exceed the general debate of whether or not the earth's climate is changing, and whether that change is caused my mankind's actions or not. The problem I see with this issue of climate change is that the proposed solutions of "free energy" are not free of negative consequences. The energy solutions of wind, solar, and geothermal do not have the energy density to satisfy humanity's energy needs. In our modern era, energy output shares a direct relation to the standard of living in a society. This means that any reduction of energy output, or the density of energy produced in a given land area effectively reduces the standard of living in that area.
This is to say that I am not a proponent of burning coal or oil to produces electricity, but rather I support strictly Nuclear power. This technology has the potential to raise the standard of living throughout the world and alleviate many problems such as disease, famine, and the distribution of resources. However, this technology carries with it the risk of more countries obtaining Nuclear based weaponry. While incidents of nuclear tests, such as those carried out by North Korea, seem to strike fear into the international community, I see no reason to panic when another country obtains these weapons. Between just the USA and Russia, enough nuclear weapons stockpile still exists to effectively wipe out modern civilization. The fledgling nuclear powers, such as North Korea and possibly Iran are not stupid, they realize that a nuclear attack on US soil or her allies would result in an annihilation of their country, not just the infrastructure and cities, but the entire landmass could be disintegrated. Once this concept of mutual destruction is realized, using a nuclear weapon will basically have the effect of detonating it inside the silo, thus opening the door for Nuclear power to be used for peaceful energy without the fear of it turning into a weapon.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Sunday, May 31, 2009
American Imperialism and the Media
It is clear that the media coverage surrounding the Iraq and Afghanistan wars do not present the real truth of the conflicts. The large corporate media firms operating in the USA have effectively convinced the public that Afghanistan is better off without the Taliban and that Iraq would be on its way to a constitutional government, if not for those blasted insurgence.
The true nature of these conflicts is that while the debate still surges around the events of 9/11, the Taliban was a force of good for the people of Afghanistan. They stabilized the region and forced out the opium trade which exploited the people and hurt the region by focusing agricultural efforts towards opium rather than edible foods. Since the US invasion of this country, the opium trade has begun anew, even growing beyond the original scope of the pre-Taliban period. Afghanistan is now the largest opium producing country in the world, and not a word of this is heard on any corporate media channels. These instruments of propaganda would rather rally the cry of more troop deployment, an action which would increase destabilization in the region as the US greenhorn troops would have difficulty distinguishing freind from foe. Accidential killings or collateral killings would occur, which would lead to the rise of similar insurgence groups as the ones in Iraq.
Regarding Iraq, make no mistake, many of the insurgence members DO affiliate with major ethnic and religious groups that have banded together in order to fight the US occupation of their soverign country. But their membership on the individual level is comprised of regular people who have lost close friends or relatives as a direct result of US occupation of the region. When you consider this fact, it is a no brainer why the Iraqi people would rebel against our forces and we would see increasing insurgence numbers. These people are not enemies of representative government, they are no haters of freedom and peace. Their lives have been impacted by our troops and our occupation, so they are completely justified to hate the american forces, as they carry out actions of imperialism within Iraq that does not benefit the Iraqi people, such as the transnational pipline.
In conclusion, I ask everyone who reads this blog to question the reasons behind these two imperial conquests, and ask yourself whether the occupation of these territories and the spending of trillions of dollars in order to maintain a military might with enough force to have an empire is in the best interests of the American people.
The true nature of these conflicts is that while the debate still surges around the events of 9/11, the Taliban was a force of good for the people of Afghanistan. They stabilized the region and forced out the opium trade which exploited the people and hurt the region by focusing agricultural efforts towards opium rather than edible foods. Since the US invasion of this country, the opium trade has begun anew, even growing beyond the original scope of the pre-Taliban period. Afghanistan is now the largest opium producing country in the world, and not a word of this is heard on any corporate media channels. These instruments of propaganda would rather rally the cry of more troop deployment, an action which would increase destabilization in the region as the US greenhorn troops would have difficulty distinguishing freind from foe. Accidential killings or collateral killings would occur, which would lead to the rise of similar insurgence groups as the ones in Iraq.
Regarding Iraq, make no mistake, many of the insurgence members DO affiliate with major ethnic and religious groups that have banded together in order to fight the US occupation of their soverign country. But their membership on the individual level is comprised of regular people who have lost close friends or relatives as a direct result of US occupation of the region. When you consider this fact, it is a no brainer why the Iraqi people would rebel against our forces and we would see increasing insurgence numbers. These people are not enemies of representative government, they are no haters of freedom and peace. Their lives have been impacted by our troops and our occupation, so they are completely justified to hate the american forces, as they carry out actions of imperialism within Iraq that does not benefit the Iraqi people, such as the transnational pipline.
In conclusion, I ask everyone who reads this blog to question the reasons behind these two imperial conquests, and ask yourself whether the occupation of these territories and the spending of trillions of dollars in order to maintain a military might with enough force to have an empire is in the best interests of the American people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
