Colonel Olrik wrote:
Yes, the E.U is clearly third world.
No EU nations ratified Kyoto, and only one EU prospective member signed it, Rumania, which could be called a third-world country.
That's quite a surprise - I thought that it was the USA in particular who "blocked" the Kyoto treaty.
But it's not that strange. BTW - many of the third world countries pollute that much because their poverty limits them to obsolete technology. If they get a chance to advance technologically, they might reduce what you call "wastage".
Yes, I know the USA is the biggest polluting nation on the planet--but look at how much we produce economically. There's a reason for so much wastage.
.... as if it's not possible for the West to reduce pollution without having it damage their economy?
"Hi there, would you like to have a cookie?"
"No, actually I would HATE to have a cookie, you vapid waste of inedible flesh!"
Colonel Olrik wrote:
Yes, the E.U is clearly third world.
No EU nations ratified Kyoto, and only one EU prospective member signed it, Rumania, which could be called a third-world country.
That's quite a surprise - I thought that it was the USA in particular who "blocked" the Kyoto treaty.
But it's not that strange. BTW - many of the third world countries pollute that much because their poverty limits them to obsolete technology. If they get a chance to advance technologically, they might reduce what you call "wastage".
Huh, read the rest of the thread.. All EU states have signed the threaty more than a year ago..
I have the feeling that the main reason that the USA opposed Kyoto merely because the USA is the most polluting nation in the world today, and that the Kyoto Treaty - if implemented - would force them to give up many of their luxuries.
I should hope so. They better give us a real good reason if they expect us to give up our luxuries.
This is all pointless, really, until the burden of proof that lies squarely on the shoulders of those who would have us ratify the Kyoto Treaty is satisfied. It doesn't matter if every country in the world has ratified the treaty; it needs to be proven that the changes proposed by the Kyoto Treaty will have any real, beneficial effect on the global climate before they are carried out to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars and untold amounts of lost productivity.
BoTM / JL / MM / HAB / VRWC / Horseman
I'm studying for the CPA exam. Have a nice summer, and if you're down just sit back and realize that Joe is off somewhere, doing much worse than you are.
Shep, I think the truth of the matter is that any political action group that is motivated enough to put up a website has an agenda to push and an 'enemy' to vent against. THere are numerous right-wing sites that vilify liberal social movements or ideals as well. I mean, I would never go to the Brady gun control site and expect 'unbiased' information.
Many people log on here and spount off to Mike (or all and sundry others) that this place, the SDnet, is an anti-Christian hate site. But they are wrong. We are an anti Trek hate si-- er, I mean, uh, debate and discussion site.
Something about Libertarianism always bothered me. Then one day, I realized what it was:
Libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to the phrase, "Work Will Make You Free."
In Libertarianism, there is no Government, so the Bosses are free to exploit the Workers.
In Communism, there is no Government, so the Workers are free to exploit the Bosses.
So in Libertarianism, man exploits man, but in Communism, its the other way around! If all you want to do is have some harmless, mindless fun, go H3RE INST3ADZ0RZ!! Grrr! Fight my Brute, you pansy!
That would be my opinion, yes. In fact I think it could be a precursor to a global cooling, in which case Kyoto could hurt us, assuming it does anything at all that the enviroment notices.
Either way, I see no problem in reducing the E.U dependency of oil, and investing in alternative energy sources. It's not as if we are swimming in oil over here.
Fair enough. If that's in your interests I wouldn't begrudge it to you.
Off-topic, but what makes you so sure that will happen?
I don't think the alternative sources available to Germany will provide electricity in sufficient quantities, unless of course they build large numbers of huge coal plants.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.
Colonel Olrik wrote:
Huh, read the rest of the thread.. All EU states have signed the threaty more than a year ago..
Actually a good chunk of the world signed the treaty much longer then a year ago. But signing is meaningless, when it came down to ratification Romania was the only state in Europe to do it. Many nations legislative bodies rejected it outright, and it was never even brought to the table in others before the whole thing fell apart. In its second incantation, in which the treaty was basically nurtured, the US however has played no part in that process as Bush withdrew from it after the US senate overwhelmingly rejected the treaty. But even the new pointless cut-rate treaty hasn't entered into force and has recently been rejected by the Russian legislature. It may never enter into force at the rate things are going.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
Colonel Olrik wrote:
Huh, read the rest of the thread.. All EU states have signed the threaty more than a year ago..
Actually a good chunk of the world signed the treaty much longer then a year ago. But signing is meaningless, when it came down to ratification Romania was the only state in Europe to do it. Many nations legislative bodies rejected it outright, and it was never even brought to the table in others before the whole thing fell apart. In its second incantation, in which the treaty was basically nurtured, the US however has played no part in that process as Bush withdrew from it after the US senate overwhelmingly rejected the treaty. But even the new pointless cut-rate treaty hasn't entered into force and has recently been rejected by the Russian legislature. It may never enter into force at the rate things are going.
Did anyone actually read the article I provided? They have ratified it. There's an E.U directive forcing Portugal (agreed by the 15 who ratified the treaty) and the other states to reduce the CO2 emissions to the pretended levels, and we are in the process of doing it.
Friday, 31 May, 2002, 17:49 GMT 18:49 UK
EU ratifies global warming pact
Industrialised nations must reduce emissions by 8%
All 15 European Union states have ratified the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, paving the way for a new international attempt to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
The ceremony took place at the United Nations headquarters in New York, where representatives from all 15 nations and the European Commission handed the required papers to the UN chief legal counsel.
MKSheppard wrote:That lists all the whackjob groups from National Alliance to
the Black Panthers and ELF, that's impartial and doesn't
descend to frothing at the mouth about "right wing extremists"
etc.
I mean, it gets boring after a while, even if I can filter out their
political slant unconsciously, I am still a bit miffed by how they attach
"right wing" to virtually everything.
For fuck's sake, just because I'm dissatisfied with how my government
does certain things, doesn't mean I'm automatically a bomb-throwing
anarchist who wants to bring it down.
Do what everyone else does. Make your own.
That's the wrong way to tickle Mary, that's the wrong way to kiss!
Don't you know that, over here lad, they like it best like this!
Hooray, pour les français! Farewell, Angleterre!
We didn't know how to tickle Mary, but we learnt how, over there!
