• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

Most important global issues

mondo

TRIBE Promoter
What do you feel are THE most important global issues facing us today?

And do you think that there are solutions or is everything based upon utilitarian ethics or Hobbesian principles?
 

exheres

TRIBE Member
hmmm...hard to say I always thought there was much truth in Calvin and Hobbs. Which one was the tiger again?

:D
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Re: Re: Most important global issues

Originally posted by Mike Richards
Canadian/ American Relations
Yah we need to smooth our relationship over with the Americans at any cost. :)
 

Mike Richards

TRIBE Member
As much as I hate Yank policy we are still in there Humongously fat shadow and if we don't get on their good side, Canadians will soon become the favorite dish of rednecks all over the US
 
tribe magazine legacy photo exhibit

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Mike Richards
As much as I hate Yank policy we are still in there Humongously fat shadow and if we don't get on their good side, Canadians will soon become the favorite dish of rednecks all over the US
I see your point, but I totally disagree with it...I guess mostly because I'm idealistic: I refuse to side with American policies if those policies sacrifice morality, human rights or international law.

...which is why I think the Canadian Alliance can take a big stick and shove it up their *
 

exheres

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by ~atp~
I see your point, but I totally disagree with it...I guess mostly because I'm idealistic: I refuse to side with American policies if those policies sacrifice morality, human rights or international law.

...which is why I think the Canadian Alliance can take a big stick and shove it up their *
You sir are about to go the way of the dodo.....but at least they will be able to say at your funeral, "He/she had passion.":D
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by exheres
You sir are about to go the way of the dodo.....but at least they will be able to say at your funeral, "He/she had passion.":D

lol I know, that's why I hate politics, nor would I ever be capable of being seriously involved in politics (although that's a contradiction).



But really, if you listen to what I'm saying, it makes complete sense, logically: I think that human rights, international law and moral decision-making should supercede political maneuvers and economic gain.

Too bad most politicians would get a good laugh out of such an "extreme" view, eh? ;)
 

man_slut

TRIBE Member
Re: Re: Re: Most important global issues

Originally posted by ~atp~
Yah we need to smooth our relationship over with the Americans at any cost. :)
They’re either with us or against us.

I think the most important issues at hand are America's current unilateral stance. It's causing a lot of harm. But in the end I believe this will be for the overall good. That is, after the neocons fuck shit up we'll learn from their mistakes and become a better global society. On a smaller note I think society really needs to take a good look at their diets and what kind of chemicals big (and small) corporations are putting in our food. I truly believe that this has a lot to do with the current health and well being (which isn't good). Which leads me to the pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceutical Industry = Evil Cash Cow.

"Proletariats of the world..."
 

OTIS

TRIBE Member
By far, the single most important global issue facing humanity today is energy. We've reached a point where we can no longer continue to rely on fossil fuels to deliver us a prosperous future, the alternatives presented really only delay the inevitable and we are at a unique point in our history (nuclear weaponry) where we cannot afford to wage the wars between industrialized nations typically fought in the past over resources. Herein lies the dilemma, as our exponential need for energy increases and world supply seemingly decreases, we need to advance to another level of energy production. Physicists predict the only source to meet our demand within the next 1-2 hundred years will come from geothermal (earth's core) energy. This will not only provide the energy we need, but will also graduate us to a new level of civilization that will then have the essentials needed to create technological marvels unthinkable with our currently limited capacity to harness energy. It's an exciting future, but one only capable if the attention is focused away from extracting the cheapest energy for the most short term gain, and towards what's most beneficial for the long term future of humanity -regardless of monetary reward. Looking at the current powers that be, it doesn't take a genius to figure out which category their modus operandi lies in.
 
tribe cannabis goldsmith - gold cannabis accessories

Aeryanna

TRIBE Member
Re: Re: Re: Re: Most important global issues

Originally posted by man_slut
Which leads me to the pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceutical Industry = Evil Cash Cow.

"Proletariats of the world..."
Hey! Don't diss the pharmaceutical industry....they help pay this gals tuition (I work in pharmaceutical labs over the summer). ;)

The most important issues: Nuclear arms, Globalization and multinational corporations, the environment and the increasing gap b/w the wealth of first and third world countries....its getting larger and as they say "If you don't feed them, soon you'll have to fight them" *insert dramatic music* :D
 

man_slut

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by OTIS
By far, the single most important global issue facing humanity today is energy. We've reached a point where we can no longer continue to rely on fossil fuels to deliver us a prosperous future, the alternatives presented really only delay the inevitable and we are at a unique point in our history (nuclear weaponry) where we cannot afford to wage the wars between industrialized nations typically fought in the past over resources. Herein lies the dilemma, as our exponential need for energy increases and world supply seemingly decreases, we need to advance to another level of energy production. Physicists predict the only source to meet our demand within the next 1-2 hundred years will come from geothermal (earth's core) energy. This will not only provide the energy we need, but will also graduate us to a new level of civilization that will then have the essentials needed to create technological marvels unthinkable with our currently limited capacity to harness energy. It's an exciting future, but one only capable if the attention is focused away from extracting the cheapest energy for the most short term gain, and towards what's most beneficial for the long term future of humanity -regardless of monetary reward. Looking at the current powers that be, it doesn't take a genius to figure out which category their modus operandi lies in.

Very interesting. I remember reading something about alternative energy sources and how the oil industry has done a lot to keep alternative energy from being successful or implemented. Anyone know what I'm talking about? There are probably a million articles on this that I'm not aware of.
 

~atp~

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by OTIS
...the long term future of humanity -regardless of monetary reward. Looking at human history, it doesn't take a genius to figure out which category their modus operandi lies in.
 

Mike Richards

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by OTIS
By far, the single most important global issue facing humanity today is energy.
That is a mere speck of importance when it comes to evolution. Look at how much evolution has slowed down. We have to weed out all the religious fundamentalists and the morons to cleanse the Gene pool. These people will be our ultimate demise!!
 

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
Fresh water, either population growth and population numbers need to be controled or we need to ind better ways of providing water.



Tough call on energy, but I argue that more people can survive for longer on a thimble of oil than a thimble of water.
 
tribe magazine legacy photo exhibit

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Mike Richards
As much as I hate Yank policy we are still in there Humongously fat shadow and if we don't get on their good side, Canadians will soon become the favorite dish of rednecks all over the US
they pissed off just abut everyone on the G8, they pissed of he bigger 2/3 of NATO. The vast majority of europe is currenty angry with the US.


they know when the time comes to buy friends, and they know who they have to buy first. This atitude of making us beg for things is over and one with, its time for some nice jestures on there end to inspire some on our end. Not the other way around!!
 

OTIS

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Ditto Much
Fresh water, either population growth and population numbers need to be controled or we need to ind better ways of providing water.



Tough call on energy, but I argue that more people can survive for longer on a thimble of oil than a thimble of water.
You can have all the water in the world, you aint moving it without energy.
 

OTIS

TRIBE Member
Population in Roman times was only in the tens of millions. The largest city in Roman times was only 1 million people (Rome) Expecting 6.1 billion people & growing to gather only aroud large fresh water sources & wells is laughable. Expecting contamination & other hazards currently handled by refinement not to be a problem is an even bigger joke. There will be a need for water yes, but it will need energy to serve the world need for it unless of course, there is a major population die off but I guess that's what the crisis is.
 

OTIS

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by ~atp~
the long term future of humanity -regardless of monetary reward. Looking at human history, it doesn't take a genius to figure out which category their modus operandi lies in.
Yes of course, but I refrained from lumping the last two generations into the same historical category because, as I eluded to, most of human history has had the luxury of being able to wage wars without the threat of mutually assured total destruction. Whether or not the current powers that be can recognize and rise to the increased responsibility is the real question.
 
tribe cannabis goldsmith - gold cannabis accessories

Mike Richards

TRIBE Member
The problem with the energy situation is oil companies. They have waaaay too much power. The only one who can stop it is the Pope!


<-----Still thinks Oil companies (and the Catholic Church) run the world;) ;)
 

Littlest Hobo

TRIBE Member
In no order:

Potable water
AIDS in Africa
Topsoil erosion
Militarization of space (not that pressing)
Who killed Princess Di
 

Mike Richards

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by Littlest Hobo
In no order:

Potable water
Agree. No water, No life

AIDS in Africa
Agree. It began in Africa, it should end there too.

Topsoil erosion
This one I don't know about.


Militarization of space (not that pressing)
Why militarize space? Worried about China? By the time China can afford a military space program, they'll be a democracy.

Who killed Princess Di
I know you're joking about this one. I agree that she was an ideal poster girl for all that is good in humanity but an important global issue...Me thinks not.
 

mondo

TRIBE Promoter
-Let's say the USA has a bunch of enemies, which they undoubtedly do. Who is public enemy #1?
-Why was Iraq placed higher than NK regardless of economic gains? I don't NK regards the USA very favourably after that spectacle.
-Does it matter who's in office when you have North Korea around?
-I get the feeling that economic aid will go straight to the military.
-If NK were to strike anyone, who would be first to go? It won't be the USA.



The North Korea Problem
Can the Bush administration dismantle North Korea's nuclear aspirations?
A satellite photo of the Yongbyon nuclear facility in North Korea

By Gregory Beals

Updated: 3:29 p.m. ET Dec. 26, 2003Dec. 26

- The heart of North Korea's atomic weapons program is its plutonium-based nuclear facility near the banks of the Yongbyon River. A patchwork of British and former Soviet-inspired engineering, it is capable of producing enough nuclear material to make a Nagasaki-sized atomic weapon in about a year. And the 8,000 spent fuel rods normally housed there contain a quantity of plutonium sufficient enough to make five more nuclear weapons. Until last year, the Yongbyon reactor was cold and its nuclear material was kept under the watchful eye of international inspectors. The suspension of activity was so comprehensive that the insides of the building were often sheeted in ice during winter. "We sat down in meetings with our North Korean counterparts wearing these old fur hats and heavy gloves," one former inspector told NEWSWEEK. "You could see the vapor coming out of your mouth when you breathed."



But after a breakdown in talks with the Bush administration a year ago, inspectors were kicked out and the Yongbyon facility was put back on line. Some experts believe that the reactor itself has produced enough nuclear material over the last year to make another bomb. Nobody outside of North Korea knows if the spent fuel rods have been processed into weapons-grade plutonium.

Meanwhile, four months have passed since the United States sat down for negotiations with Pyongyang. The most recent round of talks, scheduled for this month, was pushed back until at least February. Stung by North Korea's admission in October 2002 that it was developing yet another nuclear program, the Bush administration wants it completely, verifiably and irreversibly dismantled. The United States will provide security assurances to Pyongyang only after this demand--as well as a go-anywhere-at-any-time inspection regime--is met. For its part, North Korea insists on written, iron-clad security guarantees and desperately needed economic aid before it makes a move. "This is going to be huge hard slogging no matter what," says one State Department official.

So far, though, it has been more like no slogging at all. Washington refuses to deal with Pyongyang one on one, and State Department officials admit that the six-party format for the talks--South Korea, Japan, China and Russia are also involved in negotiations--has been unwieldy. Beyond that, the United States and its partner countries have not been able to agree even to the terms of a starting point to make a deal with the North Koreans. Critics contend that Washington is simply not negotiating with enough vigor and suggest that the first step toward any deal must involve getting the program at Yongbyon back under a freeze. "It must be a real and serious and substantive negotiation," says Wendy Sherman, the chief negotiator with North Korea during the Clinton administration. "The longer this takes, the fewer options we have and the more opportunities it gives the North Koreans."

Administration officials counter that the Clinton administration originally botched North Korea policy by agreeing in 1994 to sign a deal with Pyongyang which promised fuel aid and the eventual normalization of relations in exchange for an immediate freeze on North Korea's nuclear operations. That agreement was broken, they argue, when North Korea announced it had started up a uranium-enrichment program in October 2002. Anything less than a comprehensive deal now, they say, would be giving in to blackmail. "The Clinton administration gave the North Koreans a free pass," says a State Department official. "That is not an option now."

But United Nations diplomats who have a detailed understanding of North Korea's nuclear program argue that a long negotiation process will also make it more difficult to verify whatever agreement is reached. One diplomat with extensive experience in North Korea estimated that it would take, at minimum, three to four years under the best of circumstances to verify that Pyongyang had dismantled its weapons program. Even verifying a refreeze of the nuclear program at Yongbyon would take time. "You think that this can be handled in months?" said the diplomat. "No way."

Still others say that bickering within the Bush administration has hampered the process. They point to the fact that the chief American negotiator, James A. Kelly, has been so hamstrung by his superiors at the National Security Council that he has been forced to read from a script that has been highly scrutinized in advance by his superiors. "He has no wiggle room to actually negotiate," says a former Bush administration official. "The North Koreans are absolutely bemused by his performance." Meanwhile there is no sign that the North Koreans plan to stop making plutonium anytime soon.
 
tribe magazine legacy photo exhibit
Top