Hypocrisy

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by swanny, Jan 2, 2005.

  1. swanny macrumors regular

    swanny

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2004
    Location:
    Alberta
    #1
    It is a little to late for about 150,000 people or more to be
    finally throwing money, though welcome, at the problem and
    problems of the disparity of the human condition.
    We can now poignantly see ourselves for our global
    deficiencies and hypocrisy towards our fellow humans
    and the well touted but unpracticed religious golden rule.
    If this is what it takes to move us to care for those less
    fortunate than us then it does not bode well for our future
    and yet now it seems the sad truth is the best we can do,
    is throw money after the fact, as if money can make up for the laxity of
    the mutual responsibility we should and must have towards
    the health and well being of one and other.
    The damage is done though folks, so let us eat our humble pie
    and admit and accept our shallowness, vanity and unconscious
    hypocrisy and learn and pray that we can evolve, change and do better
    the next time when G O D or nature takes us to task.


    Alfred Jonas
    Red Deer
    Canada
     
  2. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
  3. DavidLeblond macrumors 68020

    DavidLeblond

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    #3
    Shame on me for donating money to the Red Cross? Huh?

    Did you even read what you posted? It makes no sense. I'm guessing you are talking about the tidal wave... there is nothing, absolutely nothing that could have been done to prevent that. But it happened and now people are donating the much-needed money to help.

    What is it you think we should have done? What should we be doing? What do you think the word "hypocrisy" means? Finally, what are you doing that makes you better than everyone else?
     
  4. Hoef macrumors 6502a

    Hoef

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Location:
    Houston, TX..... (keep walking)
    #4
    Sjees, it only took a couple of days for someone to come up with a lob sided anti comment.
     
  5. dotnina macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    #5
    Sorry, but what is the point of all this, man? You've recently started five threads that have ended up getting tossed into the political forums ... where you don't have posting priviledges.

    You can't post in the political forums until you're a "macrumors regular." Work on contributing to other forums on Macrumors before sharing your personal philosophies with us.
     
  6. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #6
    not to prevent it, no. but there are warning systems installed off the coasts of richer nations. the US has such a system on its west coast, according to the ABC News (or was it 60 Minutes?) story i saw. yearly budget for running the system: $4 million.

    that's certainly a low enough cost to install such systems all around the world.
     
  7. Sir_Giggles macrumors 6502a

    Sir_Giggles

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2003
    #7
    What the heck is happening in Red Deer lately? Thats what I want to know.
     
  8. musicpyrite macrumors 68000

    musicpyrite

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    #8
    $4 million is the cost of running the system for the United States. That doesn't include the cost of building it. And don't forget that $4 million a year is quite a large amount of money when we're talking about poor nations.

    I don't want to get into an argument or anything, but if India/Sri Lanka/etc. had the money to do it, I don't see any reason why the wouldn't.
     
  9. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #9
    i'm saying that the richer nations should pay for it. i wonder how many lives would have been saved w/ even 5 minutes of warning.
     
  10. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #10
    Inexpensive though they may be, the big problem with warning systems is that a large percentage of the warnings are false. Consequently, over time, the warnings become frequently ignored and the systems themselves abandoned.
     
  11. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #11
    yeah, you've said that like a thousand times now. sheesh. i'm not going to listen to you anymore.

    :)
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #12
    I'm sure they could afford it. But what is the point? This was the first Indian Ocean tsunami since 1884. If those kind US observers who had time to call Diego Garcia had even tried to call anyone else, there would have been less loss of life. It's clearly not the sensors they need so much as the communications system. But how the hell do you get warnings to isolated coastal villages with no telephone? Or to Andamanese aboriginals who don't want to talk to you?
     
  13. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #13
    Iraq blueprint: Invade & Occupy.
     
  14. Juventuz macrumors 6502a

    Juventuz

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Location:
    Binghamton
    #14
    You neglect to note that the NOAA did put out a warning to all countries involved in the Pacific warning system. Indonesia is one of the countries involved in the system, yet they took the worst brunt of the tsunami. Thailand was also made aware of it, but felt that a warning would disrupt the tourists and they didn't want to scare them. Blaming the US is the easy way out.
     
  15. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #15
    Swanny,

    I am sorry that you feel such hatred towards us.
    How do you know that we don't donate to charities? Are you making assumptions?

    Your comments seem hypocritical as well. Bashing us because we sometimes don't follow the golden rule.

    I must say I am hurt by your accusations.
     
  16. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #16
    I wasn't aware of that, and I wasn't meaning to blame the US. Quite the opposite: my main point was that Indian Ocean tsunamis are so rare, and many of the affected communities are so inaccessible and/or primitive that a permanent warning system of any sort is of questionable value. You can't insure against everything. Volcanic eruptions are at least to a certain extent predictable in advance, whereas earthquakes are hardly at all. Look at the devastation in Kobe, for instance, in a country where earthquake monitoring is about as advanced as it can get. No warning system would have saved the Indonesians or the Andamanese, since the wave must have arrived very quickly.
     
  17. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #17
    So what else do we do? Any suggestions? Or are you just beating your breast to assuage your conscience? Some of us, even in the Great Satan, do care for those less fortunate: sometimes it makes no difference.
     
  18. Juventuz macrumors 6502a

    Juventuz

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Location:
    Binghamton
    #19
    Understood and noted. I apologize if you felt that I was attacking you. I've read too much this past week saying the US should have done more to warn the various countries.

    Agreed, predicting Tsunami's is a guessing game. You can have a large earthquake in the ocean and no tsunami. Small earthquake and you've got a minor tsunami. At this point it's just a guessing game.

    I also agree that the countries in the Indian Ocean rim should develop their own network, much like the Pacific Rim network. I'm sure the US, Japan and other countries would be more than willing to help them out with it. Although I must admit that there is some concern when a nation like Indonesia participates in the system does nothing after they are notified of the potential of a tsunami.
     
  19. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #20
    Kinda like closing the gate after all the horses have run away though, isn't it?
     
  20. Juventuz macrumors 6502a

    Juventuz

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Location:
    Binghamton
    #21
    Not really, if it helps in case of another tsunami then isn't it worth it?
     
  21. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #22
    In another 120 years?
     
  22. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #23
    Well you know the way probability works... It could happen again in 10 minutes or 10,000 years.

    IOW there's still more horses in the barn, just nobody's sure when they're gonna make a run for it. But rest assured, an event like this WILL happen again in that region. Might as well prepare for it as best you can and hope for the best. Everyone should have a shot at a warning system.
     
  23. musicpyrite macrumors 68000

    musicpyrite

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    #24
    Why is it the United States', Brittish, French, United Kingdoms', etc. business to make sure that other countries are protected from tsunamis? Just because we have more money and man power than poorer nations? Thats not a very good reason. IJ Reilly and skunk made good points, why should rich nations monitor the water of poor nations when a tsunami happens every 100+ years? Eventually all the warnings sighs will be ignored, and then 'the big one' will hit.
     
  24. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #25
    for the record, i'm proposing installing such systems all around the world, not just in the recently affected area.
     

Share This Page