At MOHANADHASSAN….
-
Ah so your perspectives are from personal experience. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever, as long as it is known
Again, hopefully not patronising but explaining where some of us may be coming from.For me I always like sources when it comes to overall (big picture) type statements. I like to be able to discern from where the data originates. From publications, which aren’t necessarily unbiased but should be, is ideal - as they’ve usually conducted (and state this clearly) some form of survey.
When it comes to individual experience, it doesn’t mean it isn’t true per se, but you do have to be aware as it is likely to have that individuals personal opinion factored into it (and be more of a small picture - local representation).
I think this is the issue people, including me, are stuck on. You said 70% of people in Libya. Without sources to survey of a randomly selected respresentational cross-section of the Libyan people, this is not something you can actually reliably state let alone expect people to believe. In other words, if it is 70% of those you knew/met, this does not necessarily represent a fair cross section of society… big vs little. Doesn’t mean that the “70% of Libyans” statement isn’t true, but it does mean it is unreliable/unverified…sorry.
I do think personal experience is entirely valid and like to hear it. However, it should never be utilised to represent an entire nations view - which is how you came off as doing. If I were to take a similar approach, I could say the recent banking crisis has had zero impact upon the UK whatsoever. Why? Because I, and my friends, have experienced nothing negative. I don’t think many would appreciate us painting such a rosey picture for the nation based upon our very limited perspective (I’m a student with guaranteed funding for another year - so my income is 100% safe, and my outgoings remain fairly constant).
What experience does allow, however, is the impact of certain aspects which aren’t common knowledge, reported, or anything else. Never knew squat about Kuwait oil deal…it wasn’t on the news after all.
However, how reliable is it? Personally I’d now have to look it up, as the earlier statements undermine my confidence
edit as for insults / rantings, I generally ignore such stuff
-
I started this for a good reason, to put across a viewpoint that is not the “western” thinking. I enjoy learning, and thought some people here might too when I am in a position to enlighten others.
And it serves as a diversion while Schmackbolzen completes his exams and hopefully will complete his sur converter.
NexOse - thanks for the comparison you gave. It is still not clear that $300 is a lot of money in local currency in China for people living a non-city life. I understand that $300 is not enough to have a nice apartment and a nice car and support a modern family of wife plus 3-4 kids. But this is the same in many European countries. Until only 30 years ago people in Cyprus had no cars, and only a few had a telephone and a TV. A whole family of 4 then could live comfortably on $60 per week, $300 per month. It was the same here in the UK 50 years ago when people earned around $30 per week. Today in Greece most island families have less than $300 per month. And a loaf of bread there costs €0.80 and a kilo of average fish costs around €8.00. In the UK the average salary is more than $3000 per month and a loaf of bread costs around $1.90 and a kilo of average fish costs around $27 per kilo, lamb is around $10 per kilo. So food is relatively cheap here - but then we pay council taxes and fuel is expensive, car running costs are expensive, parking costs are expensive, getting to work by public transport is expensive, and other payments take a lot of money out of our pockets every month that we cannot spend on ourselves. Here it is not possible to close your door, turn off the electricity and gas and water and escape from “running” expenses. I know I can do that (except for water) in many other countries.
On the other hot debate:-
One of my points is that people in the “west” should not apply their own standards and expectations to other countries because you do not fully understand the culture, you disagree with their fundamental beliefs, with their fundamental values of discipline, respect and order (not enforced but of themselves), and therefore you cannot relate to nor judge what is good for those peoples or countries. Your expectation is to have a say in your country’s behaviour and for nobody to control your life, including having no discipline if you so see fit, nor have it imposed on you (by the way this shows in virtually every UK senior school). But this has never been the way in many countries. Consider yourself lucky. But in fact we are all controlled in not-so-evident ways (heavy fines, taxation, prejudice, victimisation) and we all have very little say in our country’s behaviour. Think about this and you might agree.
On Saddam, the shia and sunni - there is victimisation of shia in virtually every arab country, for a long-standing religious difference. The Iraqi Ba’ath party held supremacy because they were the largest party, and supported Arab unity! But you don’t mention the Kurds or the people classified as “marsh Arabs” - various tribes - who repeatedly tried to overthrow the government. One tribe tried to ambush Saddam, to kill him - so they died. All 150 of them, it was stated in his trial, one of the reasons for which he was hanged. I don’t know the details, but what did it mean to me? Big deal - you risk, you may die, this is the risk, we are not talking about kids’ games, but about death as the stake. Seek the death of another, especially a well-supported other, and it is your risk that you might be killed instead. You yourselves would mobilise your own forces against them if it were you in power and in the gunsight. If Saddam had done this while in popularity with the Yanks, it would have been called “a failed coup attempt against the legitimate government of Iraq”.
Tribal - you’ve not lived in a tribe and you do not understand tribal, evidently, when you think your imagined view is what happens. I will try ot explain to you what really happens in tribal countries; many still live in the desert, in semi-permanent camps, not in cities. Just like your Gypsies in your countries, but more of them and more powerful and more aggressive. They team up to depose others, usually by political influence, and then they turn on each other in a continual struggle for position and for control. In extreme times they will take to arms even today. This is the natural thing for them to do, it is not different families of the same people, but different peoples from different parts of different countries, and each has its own “royalty”, a Sheikh, whose blood-line goes back a thousand years in some cases. Some have in fact originated from the same families, when some rebellious young man who would not follow his leaders was thrown out or went his own way of his own choice to start his own tribe - raiding and killing members of other tribes to live. They are only in the same geographic countries today because the Brits, French, Belgians and Turks divided the territories as they saw fit. Even in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, they are paid by the governments in cash and in favours to keep the peace. This is how tribalism works. It is an ancient liaison of convenience just as it is in business today between large corporations - and oil consumers! In Kuwait, 40% are originally from Saudi tribes, 40% from Iraqi tribes and 10% Iranian origin, and 10% others. If you saw “Lawrence of Arabia” did you think the tribes were just a myth, just to make the story more “action”? Or did you think they teamed up permanently after they were temporarily united against the Turks? How do you think “the poor people” would like being ruled by another strong tribe replacing the last one? They really believe that they can vote who gets in, right? Choose one of their local people that they think will look after them? No. That is not what will happen, not even on Egypt.
Go on from there. Check the history of Afghanistan for the past 200 years. Start from here: http://www.onwar.com/aced/nation/all/afghan/index.htm
Those people should be left to sort out their problems alone, they have always fought each other and united only against an external invader - Brits, Persians, Russians all tried it in the past, and not just recently. When this session of Yank and Brit intervention is over they will go back to fighting each other again until another militia or stronger tribal union enforces peace on them again. And then it will all repeat, ad infinitum.
The model modern tribal Arab soceity is the UAE. Each state is the home of a ruling tribe with a following of other minor tribes. Since you don’t like what I say because it is I that says it, read about Sheikh Rashid Al-Maktoum of Dubai, to learn how he honourably united two continually-warring tribes. He was the father of Sheikh Mohammed Al-Maktoum. Tell us here what exactly he did that was significant, so I know you are researching properly. That should teach what Tribes really means.
Everyone here seems stuck on Libya and “Ghaddafi get out”. Wrong. He needs to restore order. But it is not just him fighting alone, and he is not threatening his generals with death. They are providing their support to his government willingly, and so are his forces of ordinary soldiers. You still choose to overlook that his government is still the lawful government of that country. Apply your own percentages if you refuse mine - at what point do you think does a minority become a majority, or a majority become a minority? The real, actual majority in every country is silent. As I have tried to explain to you twice, there is an easy gauge of popularity in these countries - at what point does the military turn against the government.
In the meantime, imposing a no-fly zone over Libya is an act of war against a legitimate government - and at the moment they are well equipped, so watch the sparks fly if it happens.
Why do you think the “west” will not turn against Bahrain nor Saudi Arabia, nor Oman, nor Syria, Jordan? Because they are not anti-“west”. But why should a government not be hostile to the west? After all, isn’t democracy all about doing what the people of that country want? Remember Dom Mintoff of Malta? Where’s the analogy? Can you find this hidden connection?
Ghaddafi and his government kept their popularity because of his stance. And because they allowed the Libyan tribes a big say in governing themselves and their local communities - he had no choice, they would have turned on him and deposed him easily. People in the “west” laughed at his self-selected title of “Colonel” and not pompous “General”, without understanding the very good reasons - that he did not want to overshadow his generals, that he wanted to show submission to their greater military skills in order to keep their goodwill and support. And he let them run the forces as they wished.
I’m not supporting any particular government, but their right (Oman, Libya, Bahrain. Saudi Arabia, and others) to continue as long as they have majority support. And they unquestionably do. A few hundred thousand rebels does not constitute a swing of the majority to the opposition, when the population in the millions. You seem to think that the troubles in Egypt are over - let me reassure you that I am not so sure. But I am sure that the poor and ordinary people will see no difference in the long run, and may even suffer worse.
Many of you are not aware of my age or background, or where I’ve lived nor what questions I’ve asked nor what I’ve learnt from local people, nor my attitude nor if I have any inclination to “flavour” my statements, nor with what percentage of my own “feelings”. So up to a point I understand “why” you so strongly reject my viewpoint.
But I will say with a great deal of certainty that I possibly know more about the peoples in those countries than perhaps all of you non-arab people put together,because I have taken the trouble to ask and be informed by the people of those countries. You can always say “people of your own age only do not represent the people” - because you are still young and innocent. I guess you also pooh-pooh’d your dads and grand-dads when they talked about things you didn’t believe. I wonder how many of you know of countries called Palestine, Tanganyika, Abyssinia, Nubia, or recently Yugoslavia. Or the big one called the USSR. You will only find some of them in maps from the 1960s. But if you don’t find them then I guess you will still say I’m talking out of my arse. The joke is that in years to come your own children will say the same to you.
So you never heard of the US contract to buy oil at $7 per barrel. Or of the quarterly visits by a US aircraft carrier to Kuwait, to pick up their quarterly payments for the liberation of Kuwait? One of the carrier’s huge hovercraft passed along the coast near my offices, in plain view. And then went back the same afternoon or sometimes the next day, and the carrier went away again. I didn’t know what was happening until I asked and was told by my boss, a key member of one of the five top families. You maybe think I am just re-inforcing my point with another lie, the Yanks are really all good guys and liberated Kuwait for free, right? I can tell you otherwise. Did you ever even hear of the Chevrolet Caprice that I mentioned, the car that failed to sell in the US? Kuwait bought many thousands. But as it happened it was good enough, was a strong car for the area, had great AC, and gained popularity there - along with the outdated Suburban. So overall it wasn’t a bad thing, unlike the galvanised steel water pipes, which had to be replaced within 10 years because they had corroded - of course.
I can tell you many truths about the countries I have lived and worked in, some are still unbelievable to those who believe the UK and USA are pristine and clean and respectable. I can tell you they are not. But that is business in the real world. How many of you have done business outside your own country? How many of you have led a business?
In contrast I don’t comment heavily on peoples or countries that I know little about. I hope you noticed that.
Just trying to get you youngsters to broaden your outlook on different peoples, and to understand that even a couple of million protesters does not represent a majority in a population of tens of millions if not hundreds of millions.
-
@ST, many chinese family only have one child, but in non-city area, government allowed second child if the first child not a boy.
Im not say $300 will make people hunger, most of us just live so so. And i note that you only counted the food.
We also need pay taxs (most of tax included in price of every commodities), and fuel and water and electric and phone bills and most you paying. We not living in primitive society.
Well, i reply this just for anwser your question.
-
Thanks NexOse.
China has many problems to overcome because of the high population, terrain and great distances, and in many ways has set an example for other countries.
Tax is with everyone everywhere. Here we also pay continual tax - tax on earnings, and “Value Added Tax” - VAT - on many of the things we buy, and this becomes tax - on - tax.
There is a problem in comparing foreign currencies and earnings without knowing the cost of food and consumables in that country.
Some time ago we learned that factory workers in China were being paid the equivalent of $30 per month - of course by our standards it is total poverty, but it was enough in local currency to live at a minimum level.
Now it seems China has many new millionnaires too, the largest number of Rolls Royce and Bentley cars is going to China. And with that I think there will be a big problem of inflation - price increases - there?
-
StarTrader wrote:
Thanks NexOse.Now it seems China has many new millionnaires too, the largest number of Rolls Royce and Bentley cars is going to China. And with that I think there will be a big problem of inflation - price increases - there?
Maybe. your view point is similar with some amateurish commentator in China, but many professional commentator believe (or want to make other people believe) high price because appreciation of CNY. If you want to talk this, that will be another endless question.
Hey, why we don’t talk something more Interested like the damaged nuclear power station?
-
What, really? It’s called a natural disaster for a reason.
-
I heard a top secret experimental butterfly flapped it’s wings in France provoking mass shoe throwing demonstrations in Egypt which reverberated throughout the middle east and eventually resulted in a quake and tsunami in Japan. It’s true.
Before you question this, you should be aware that I apprenticed in mechanical engineering and then spent twelve years travelling around the globe as an engineer with TRW. I’ve worked with automotive firms such as Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Peugeot, Volvo, BMW as well as many plant and control firms the likes of siemens, fanuc, hoffman, wavis, cincinnati, becker etc, etc. I might be younger than ST but I still know some #$%%.
You will respect my authority. -
Sad enough for me to see all that destruction and pain caused by the Quake and the Tsunami !
What I was tryin to say in the previous post is:
The consequences due to the lack of resposibility in natural regards is and always was a problem in this world.
Cause profitability has always main priority.
The risks of running such a unreckonable force like a nuclear
powerplant was always well known and to place it in an area of incalculable tectonical movement was more than risky.
But no matter of geographical issues my oppinion is
It can happen all over the word… anytime… anywhere and it was only a matter of time…The horrid result is what we see right now.
Sad… Very sad !!! My best wishes go to those who are suffering. -
I’m French and I think japanes are in a bad situation, if one reactor core explods, that’s not Tchernobyl, not the two atomsbomb of the end of the last world war. It will be 100 time this three events, so…. Ouch!!! It will be a massacre! The chaos is at the door of this country!
By the way French peoples argue the nuclear energy, but it’s not the same thing, we have good geologic position and our security is maximum. So French peoples has no reason to think about a nuclear explosion in France. We can’t made a comparison.
-
The case of Japan is extreme. A 9.0 earthquake is nearly unheard of; they couldn’t have possibly planned for it. On top of that, the quake itself did not in fact damage the plants, it’s the later tsunami that caused the wreckage by destroying the auxiliary generators. This is in fact proof that Japan was very, very well prepared. Remember the Richter scale is logarithmic; a 9.0 earthquake is 100 times stronger than a 7.0 one. You can be absolutely certain they’ll be making bulletproof tsunami protections in the next couple of years so that this does not happen again.
The nuclear power plant is in a critical situation, but it won’t make a new Chernobyl. Chernobyl was a man-made disaster that involved some painfully incompetent management. This involves nuclear engineers from one of the top countries in the world; there’s just no comparison possible.
Honestly, the sole thing I’ll agree upon is that those plants should all be decommissioned and their fuel disposed. They need to be replaced by modern technologies that are vastly more efficient, powerful and safe.
-
Freestalker.fr wrote:
I’m French and I think japanes are in a bad situation, if one reactor core explods, that’s not Tchernobyl, not the two atomsbomb of the end of the last world war. It will be 100 time this three events, so…. Ouch!!! It will be a massacre! The chaos is at the door of this country!By the way French peoples argue the nuclear energy, but it’s not the same thing, we have good geologic position and our security is maximum. So French peoples has no reason to think about a nuclear explosion in France. We can’t made a comparison.
French:
Sur la grande faille active de Nimes, à Marcoule, le réacteur Phénix est remis en route……
…
en remettant en route à grand frais, un vieux réacteur qui na jamais pu fonctionner durablement sans ennuis de toutes sortes, et ce, dans une zone de sismicité importante.Translation:
On the main active fault in Nimes, at Marcoule, the PHOENIX reactor is restarted …
…
by restarting it at great cost, an old reactor that has never been able to operate for long without any kind of trouble, and this, in an area of significant seismicity.link: http://www.dissident-media.org/infonucleaire/phenix.html
So in France, we make some “no sense” experiment with nuclear, and without taking care about population… so we are able to have some kind of “disaster” in France too…
The document is date in the 2003 Year, but the probleme is the same, 2 plants are actually biuld on seismic fault areas…
-
-
It’s correct, 58 nuclear reactors actualy running…
Administration is good, but they make some mistakes sometimes, but reports are not “publicly released” ^^
I think we (humans of course) need to think about stop nuclear and develop new energy, more clean, less dangerous… But it’s an utopie since nuclear make monney, and governements need monney… so, while nuclearcan make lot of profit, nuclear will survive^^ -
Ezekiel wrote:
It’s correct, 58 nuclear reactors actualy running…
Administration is good, but they make some mistakes sometimes, but reports are not “publicly released” ^^
I think we (humans of course) need to think about stop nuclear and develop new energy, more clean, less dangerous… But it’s an utopie since nuclear make monney, and governements need monney… so, while nuclearcan make lot of profit, nuclear will survive^^Pretty much sums it up. For example, Norway pretty much gets all its energy from hydro (water) power. Now, there have been talks with Germany to install a cable that could transport the clean energy from Norway to Germany, however, due to nuclear lobbyists some necessary regulations for this cable are blocked from the German side.
-
any sort of power makes money. its just, that nuclear reactors translate energy faster and more energy and are therefore more efficient economically. neither is a nuclear reactor dependant from e.g. weather. but looking at canada, who are producing electric energy from the kinetic energy of water in an amount enough to even be sold to the united states, there appears nothing to be stopping us from refusing usage of nuclear power. its a question of time, only for now.
-
Energy generation is dirty. You’ll find reasons to object to any source, any. Pick your poison.
I think we can’t rest on just one source. A mix of hydro, solar, wind (all three only where possible) and nuclear would probably be the best. Like it or not, nuclear is by far the most efficient energy source. Cutting funding and support for nuclear means we’d suddenly lose the most advanced and powerful energy source we’ve ever discovered. With proper security measures, nuclear is safe.
By cutting funding to nuclear, all we’ll end up with is that old plants will stick around for longer because those who run them (business folks) would rather extract every drop of money out of decaying, unsafe plants. They won’t fund new plants themselves, not with the extreme costs driven up by bureaucracy and politics.
-
what about that new powerplant working on base of nuclear fusion. it is said to be far more efficient than nuclear fission plants ever could be, but far cleaner - the radioactive materials produced are less in amount and are fading faster. guess that is where we are actually going to one day.
-
Fusion is one of those things that’s always 50 years away. We’re not speaking in terms of unicorns and fairies, right? So we need something proven that works now.
-
FriendlyFire wrote:
Energy generation is dirty. You’ll find reasons to object to any source, any. Pick your poison.I think we can’t rest on just one source. A mix of hydro, solar, wind (all three only where possible) and nuclear would probably be the best. Like it or not, nuclear is by far the most efficient energy source. Cutting funding and support for nuclear means we’d suddenly lose the most advanced and powerful energy source we’ve ever discovered. With proper security measures, nuclear is safe.
Problem is how to ensure security measures is proper. Maybe when a nuclear plant got fault, first people be killed exactly is who keep it working safe, and then, the plant will running by computer automaticly.
Hope those Japanese can run away as far as they can.
