|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:16 pm
First off, I would like to state that I am going to be using a varied form of the Socratic Method. Basically, I will attempt to make anyone who I am debating against contradict themselves in some form or fashion through the use of logic, common knowledge, and bare facts. I will, at all costs, try to avoid divulging any moral obligations that I have on the issue and keep my argument strictly facts. I am doing this 1. to get people to actually defend their morals with more than "Well, my mommy said so" and 2. to get people to formulate new ideas and opinions, to question what they know.
So, again, my arguments do not necessarily reflect my moral or personal values in any way, shape, or form, though in certain cases, said arguments might well be mine true views on the subject. I say this so that you are not unduly alarmed by and rash or morally controversial statements I may make in the course of the debate.
And with that, shall we begin?
---
(on a side note, by "Africa" I am generally referring to the southern half of the continent... generally)
Alright, Africa. So, we all know about the AIDS epidemic, the resistance groups such as the Lord's Hand Resistance, the civil unrest, the genocides, the blood diamond cartels, etc., correct? Well, why not bloody well level the continent (ignoring the mechanics, this is in theory)? It would solve many problems that the continent faces; unstable governments, disease, rebellions, etc.
Admittedly, yes, Africa does produce a good amount of diamonds, exports in the billions of dollars annually; however, much of that is from illegal cartels and smuggling. Apart from diamonds, the majority of Africa really holds little to offer other than various oil caches, which could easily be procured by any dominant country, or even controlled by the UN.
As such, due to the ethnic and religious strife, disease, lack of technology in many areas, etc. there are few legitimate reasons that one should not level the continent.
---
Alrighty, so, again, I do not necessarily support this, nor have I researched it in particular detail-- it is supposed to be a common knowledge and moral debate. So, if anyone would like to take a crack at it, please be my guest.
-Chris
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 8:34 pm
Okay, I'm just going to go with a rather short answer to start:
Does it not completely go against the wanting to rescue a continent and its people, seeing as this is a solution to the problems in Africa, to destroy both? Is that not in itself contradictory?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 11:58 pm
Well, why not bloody well level the continent?
Because it does not benefit us, (first world countrys, I'm assuming thats who "we" are.) except we won't see pictures of kids with flys in their eyes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 5:33 pm
I think the Europeans should be solely responsible considering most of the problems stem from their colonization and abuse of Africa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Resurrection Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:17 pm
Quote: Well, why not bloody well level the continent? Because: 1: You would be destroying a massive chunk of the eco-system. 2: You would be destroying the original home of "The black man", and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be happy with that. 3: Destruction of oil deposits. Not a single "Important" country in the world would support this ideal, just for this reason. 4: Bad media showing. The media would eat this up like candy, you would soon have it twisted and have the whole world at your throat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 7:57 pm
I personally would love to go to Casablanca and Cairo, which is reason enough for me not to want to level the entire continent.
Besides, for us first-worlders, Africa provides glorious areas for scientific exploration, being that craddle of life and what not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 9:30 am
The Resurrection I think the Europeans should be solely responsible considering most of the problems stem from their colonization and abuse of Africa. Agreed. And secondly, it would benefit no one. It's a bad idea, not a debate. 1. A ruthless waste of human, plant, and animal life. 2. It would cost a ton of countries money, every year, forever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:46 am
By "levelling" the continent, we would be committing genocide. Not to mention that such actions go against the UN Declaration of Human Rights:
Quote: From UN Declaration of Human Rights:
Article One: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article Three: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Those people have every right to live just like any person in the developed world. We all climbed out of the Mercantilism and into the Industrial Age thanks to the exploitation of those people, so it is our direct responsibility to them to get the continent into a working order. And, before anyone crows too loudly of Europe, lets remember that every white person in the Americas is a direct descendent of European settlers or later immigrants who settled this land with the recourses from African colonies... Yet, even if things did not stand this way, it would still be our obligation to help, because, for one thing, they are people just like us. What happened to compassion?
As for the continent itself, aside from flora, fauna and natural resources (mainly diamonds and oil), it also presents a great archaeological importance - we all, not just back people, came from there, according to the evolutionary theories. What gives us the right to decide upon their extermination?
Finally, even if we were to level Africa, how would we go about it? Nuke it? There's a thought! Like we did not have enough cancer incidents without that...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fashionable Conversationalist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 8:41 pm
Well, think of it this way.
During the medieval period, if you had been looking around for the place most deserving of leveling, the logical choice probably would have been Europe! Africa is far more resource-rich than Europe is, which is why Europeans were so keen on colonizing it from the 18th century on. And during the medieval period it was rampant with disease and warfare on an almost unbelievable scale. Yet Europeans overcame all that. (Overcame it a little too well, when you look at the history of the last few hundred years.)
Similarly, who's to say a few centuries from now, Africa won't have made a similar transformation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 2:06 pm
I will never let you see me cry...
Africa is, yes a war-torn contienet, but it has numerous deep cultures and odd traditions.
Instead of nuking them, because they don't have much, let's help them develop. We can do something similar to what happened in Japan, in a sense force them to stop war by getting rid of armies and then have them under our protection against rebel forces.
And, let's think about possibly rebuilding the countries, (Note: Just an idea, do not attack me.) after all the village tension, quickly helped start the animosity.
I will kill you before the first tear falls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Resurrection Vice Captain
|
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 3:01 pm
Olya By "levelling" the continent, we would be committing genocide. Not to mention that such actions go against the UN Declaration of Human Rights: As long as the UN's primary strategy for defending what they declare are the rights of ever human being is "Please stop Mr. Bad Man.", they can go ******** themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 05, 2007 4:15 am
The Resurrection Olya By "levelling" the continent, we would be committing genocide. Not to mention that such actions go against the UN Declaration of Human Rights: As long as the UN's primary strategy for defending what they declare are the rights of ever human being is "Please stop Mr. Bad Man.", they can go ******** themselves.
Maybe, but, at the same time, is it truly correct to demand peace and equality of rights with guns and violence? Does that not cripple the idea of democracy and mock the sanctity of human life? UN is a peacekeeping organization, not a group that enters another's territory with hardcore military equipment and demands that everyone play by their rules - that' United States' job.
From Wikipedia.org:
The Human Security Report 2005,(23) produced by the Human Security Centre at the University of British Columbia with support from several governments and foundations, documented a dramatic, but largely unrecognized, decline in the number of wars, genocides and human rights abuses since the end of the Cold War. Statistics include:
a 40% drop in violent conflict;
an 80% drop in the most deadly conflicts; and
an 80% drop in genocide and politicide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fashionable Conversationalist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 05, 2007 6:48 am
Since the South African shake up 15 per cent of mineral rights must go to disadvataged South Africans within 5 years.
That's a whopping 85 per cent NOT owned by those who really need it.
Rather than flatten the whole place and lose all that cultural heritage why not give Africans what they deserve, which is FULL rights to their own minerals. Then THEY can send aid to the nearly bankrupt West.
The only reason they're poor is because the West stole it all. I'm not convinced AIDS was accidental either. Probably an escape from a germ warfare lab.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 05, 2007 10:43 am
every 3 seconds, someone dies of AIDS.
for those of you that watch American Idol, they recently raised over 170 billion dollars to help needy. They visited many poverty-stircken places in Africa but there are many places that have yet to be reached. And I feel there are many hidden things which coul sadden us but have not been revealed.
I feel that Africa will need to move faster in order to save more people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
