aid comparison

[AfghanSoulja]

BP oil Spill

Fatal Casualties : 11
Injured : 17

Aid Annouced : 20 Billion USD
Time Frame : 2010

Afghanistan

Casualties :

Direct deaths: at least 10,172 - 12,969
Indirect deaths: 3,200 - 20,000
Direct & indirect deaths: 13,372 - 32,969
Indirect deaths after initial invasion: n/a

Injured: Unkown

Aid Annouced : 10 Billion USD
Time Frame : 2001-2010

[abubaker]

only if your muslim

[pekhawar]

Wow, This is a really really interesting thread. Its so sad to see that highlighted.

It shows the world the power of the USA. It just made England pay up 20billion in a heart beat.

[AfghanSoulja]

the real number of casualties in Afghanistan are easily ten times the ones ive quoted

[pekhawar]

^So are the Americans casualties.

[Gaia]

Hmm... I don't think the question is whether fish are worth more than human beings. This is a very reductionist way to look at it, which will end up reducing the importance of your question.

I agree with you, and think you're with me, in the indignation caused by the perception of the dubious ways to value human lives (not that it should ever be priced, but, we do live in the world of capital so, lets go with this flow). However, I will always stay with the fish if you put them in the sentence.

I'm up to discuss, though, why would US American lives be worth more than Afghan lives. Then, we can carry the discussion to the political level, to the projection of power, to the allies one makes allong the way, to the imposition of values and beliefs, and so on.

Fishes are never fishes in natural disasters, be them caused by the human being or whatever storm comes our way. When fishes die in the Mexican Gulf, people die in the shores of every beach and river in the world. Not only fishes are dying in the Gulf of Mexico, corals, birds, natural reserves, possible medicines die together; when the water is contamined in the Gulf of Mexico, the water along coasts of the Atlantic might as well want to get ready to the results, cause lives (vegetal, irrational or rational) will be lost, and we can't just pretend it won't affect our lives. Entire communities might live by the products of those waters; respiratory, skin, blood diseases might be caused by the pollution of those waters; fishes are contamined, waters are contamined... Humans lives are affected.

So, please, do not oppose fish to humans; oppose the kinds of discourses being applied in both situations; 'cause, when you oppose fish to people, you force me to a choice I have no shame in making: I take the fish. They've not moved a finger (or a fin) to rage a war against me or you. For whatever reason.

[AfghanSoulja]

^ spare me that lecture, the amount of money these hippies whisk off to save whales you can feed the entire Africa..And I would love to see you choose a fish over the life of your son or someone else who is close to you.

[Gaia]

Well, honey, if I shall spare you the lecture, you might as well want to spare me the simplism of your questioning. I’m sorry if I offended your reductionist order, I just thought a more inclusive opinion could be in its place. No worries, it won’t happen again.

And, since you don’t know me, don’t make that kind of affirmation. I didn’t even start to tell you what I believe in and what I would fight for. As I respect your easy views; please, respect that I will take a second or two to better considerations before any action.

Peace!

[Roshina]

I, too, would choose the fish over human -- any time -- if forced to choose at all. Gaia gave a good reason and argument for that.

[AfghanSoulja]

And then eat the same thing ? Anyways this is ridiculous, if I have to defend the deaths of 20000 afghans against some stupid sea monkeys on an afghan forum then I doubt there is much hope left for them

[Gaia]

As long as you think Afghans isolated from the rest of the world, I beg to warn you, you won’t find a place for them in this world at least.

Just saying.

[AfghanSoulja]

I've seen some really ridiculous remarks on this forum, but hearing this from you educated lot..for the first time I'm actually ticked off at someone on internet.. Anyways go preach this in some other thread.

[Gaia]

AfghanSoulja,

That was not an scholar remark, that was a very personal way to point something I thought should also be avented in your questioning. And I tell you, that was a friendly one. I keep my scholar ways to discussions in which I’m aware of the other discussants views and capabilities and really care about their remarks, because, in that case, I can go all the way, despite their feelings.

I’m sorry to touch one of your most sensitive cares, but that just came with the package.

I’m not invading your forum, an Afghan forum, to preach that fishes are more valuable than human beings. What you fail to notice in my response was the deeper field I was chosing to fight for.

If you want to question the decision for this or that government to invest more in one issue than in the other, you might as well want to be more realistic (and maybe I should say, more pragmatic) in approaching their reasons. Whenever you go for the “are fishes more valuable than Afghans”, people will be able to come up with reasons as fragile as the question you posed to answer to your questions with naïve, cheap, responses, ‘cause that was what your question asked for.

Responding with bad mouthing and telling me to shut up will not make your argument stronger or your views any more respected.

Let me break my understanding to you, in the hopes you will be a little less refractory to the idea I tried to add to your questioning than what you just proved yourself to be.

I tried to make it clear, with my casting of reasons for why I would chose fishes, that when you talk fishes in this particular issue, you’re not only talking about fishes. You are – or, at least, you should be – talking about human lives. Contamination, pollution, medicines, diseases affect not only fishes (which, since you force me to be more clear, are the least of my concerns in here), but human beings. That said, I think you can have a better understanding of my first post.

As for defending the deaths of whatever number of Afghans you come up with in spite of fishes.... I’ve never defended the death of anything. Much less of Afghans. Well, I’ll only defend the deaths of cockroaches, so, feel safe. But, I kindly request you the right to make this a little more human thought: I’ve never defended the death of any human being, despite their tribe, nationality, color, belief or whatever reason you think is good to kill anyone. And I will, again, tell you about what I told you just minutes ago: as long as one thinks Afghans apart from the rest of the world, you will nor find a place for Afghans in this world at least. And the reason is simple (which is different from simplist, by the way): There is an world order, and, you like it or not, you will have to be aware of that in order to fight or adhere.

If Afghans want a place of their own, that means to convince their neighboors (to begin with) of their right to own it; if Afghans want their needs to be considered in threads between fishes and people, they’ll have to place better reasons than “we exist for .............. (insert whatever number makes you more comfortable and happier) thousands years and we deserve more than them”; if Afghans want a State, they will have to come up with reasoning, not only bombs, because, I think you know that better than I do, bombs and wars have prove themselves to be not of much good results for Afghans of any kind in the last couple of centuries.

If you think that presenting numbers and avoiding further discussions is the way to win a war, I can tell you right now you will never win one.

While you’re questioning with naïvety the investments made to save what you say to be fishes and I can reason to be a lot more, the US governement, the Europe and the Western Hemisphere will still invest more in [what you call] fishes than in saving Afghans. And I tell you why: prove me your fight to be more valuable than mine. You are Afghan, your family is Afghan. That Gulf is US American, Westerner, that company is European.... that money was US American and European (and I promise I will not make na Economic thesis to break this affirmation, I will let this up to you). They invest their money where they want to. UNLESS, you are able to defeat their reasoning. I anticipate to you: You are not going to change their minds by telling them to shut up and look for another thread.

You are superficialy relativizing the subject and while doing that, you’re unnoticedly weakening your own arguments.

[AfghanSoulja]

Look I don't have the time nor do I give a hoot about some shrimps..I'll ask the admin to change the title of this thread to something that is less offensive to tadpoles..since it's obvious you wont stop derailing this thread. Now can you please take this stuff put it in a relevant thread and not put these mindless sermons here ?