- This topic has 13 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 21 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This is a story…that really moved me. I guess maybe because I love animals and happy endings. A very happy story out of so much sorrow.
Nice to hear something positive coming out of this disaster, which has certainly moved everybody worldwide, even prisoners here in England gave up cigarettes over New Year, and donated money to the Tsunami relief fund.
Those are some kind hearted prisoners. I think the prisoners in the US here gave up gang banging in the showers for an entire day out of respect for the lack of gang banging going on there. It touches the heart, doesn’t it? Even google put up a little link that gives suggestions on how to help them out over there. *sniffle*
RabidKitten wrote:Those are some kind hearted prisoners. I think the prisoners in the US here gave up gang banging in the showers for an entire day out of respect for the lack of gang banging going on there. It touches the heart, doesn’t it? Even google put up a little link that gives suggestions on how to help them out over there. *sniffle* Yeah right……… n hookers kept their legs crossed all day….. have a little respect for the 150 thousand dead.. if you have nothing positive to say please, in respect of the dead, shut your mouth, or it may be mistaken for your ass.RabidKitten wrote:Those are some kind hearted prisoners. I think the prisoners in the US here gave up gang banging in the showers for an entire day out of respect for the lack of gang banging going on there. It touches the heart, doesn’t it? Even google put up a little link that gives suggestions on how to help them out over there. *sniffle*Is that a joke or what? If someone made a joke like that about the 3,000 or whatever killed on 9/11 you would hear about it for sure. I wouldnt excpet something like this from you Rabid.Yes, I have a comment or two. Firstly, not to sound mean, of course, but you need to learn the edit button. Rusted would be the expert on how to make ones mouth resemble their ass. And really, I give no appology for what I have said. Really I think that everyone who has commented has misread and misunderstood my comment.
But first, before I get into my redeming commentary, a side note. The happenings on 9-11 are completely different than those of this tsunami. Firstly, the happenings on 9-11 were an attack, an act of war from another people who are honest to gods psychopaths. Poor souls who were propaganda’d to death into thinking some rather outragious things, but never the less, it was a concious thing that could have been prevented. This was a natural, blameless desaster. Those people know of the risks that they take when they live there. Yes, it sucks when my house floods, but it is something that happens here in Minnesota, and I accept that fact just as I accept the fact that we get tornado scares constantly, and some day my house could be ripped right off its foundation and I could be impaled and pinned to a tree by a piece of straw. But I accept the risk. Yes, it is unfortunate when people in Tornado Alley get blown away and killed by a tornado, but it’s called “tornado alley” for a reason. Yes, it is a shame when people whos houses are on a cliff, on stilts half in the water get washed away, but it is risk that you conciously take when you put your damned house on stilts in the middle of a river (which I still can’t understand why one would do that once their house it taken away for the 5th time). The only similarities between those two happenings, 9-11 and the tsunami, is that I am tired of the hype and the moaning and groaning between the both of them. Commentary to the contrary is the price one pays for making their views known, and a price I happily recognize and pay.
What irritates me is the world can say “Oh, a million people in rowanda are systematically being murdered by people…that sucks…oh well.” and pull the UN out and ignore any kind of help they can give when there are millions of people crying out to the world for help and there is something you can do to -prevent- the deaths, but they go on for months about a natural desaster that, while being very tragic, is really just a pissing contest between the countries. Who can send more aid, who can care more, who can prove who wrong. It is a natural desaster, nothing can be done to prevent it, and these people -knew- they were in a tsunami area. That’s like people in Florida acting -surprised- when they get hit by a tropical storm or a hurricane. They know the risk and accept it. Just as those poor souls who were killed in the tsunami knew the risks and accepted them. It is sad, but gods, when the world takes no measures of prevention when a million people are being systematically -murdered- over a span of -months-, but then has a hissy fit about this natural desaster that could not have been prevented at all, it just irritates me. But really, that is neither here, nor there, it’s just an irritation of mine.Now for my retribution.
My comment was not saying anything disrespectful about the dead. It is sad, and my goodness, I certainly am saddened by the mass loss of life, and while I am irritated about the pissing contest and by the lack of help in other places, I am glad that people are at least doing something -some- of the time.
My point here was…what usefulness does giving up cigarettes in the UK do? It’s completely useless, it does nothing for the people dying or caught in mudslides or anything. It is an empty gesture used to make people -feel- like they’re doing something when indeed they are doing nothing. It’s simply and attempt at selfish self preservation. And what does it matter what a bunch of murders, rapists and convicts do? I’m sure that there’s some little orphan in the tsunami area right now going “Gosh, my house is gone, my mom and dad died and my dog is missing…but hey, child pornographers in the UK aren’t smoking today, just for me! Yahoo.”
My point was to bring to light the fact that it is a nothing, selfish gesture by people who are lower than scum by comparing it to something that is indeed a totally useless contribution.Oh, and Rusted, I really doubt that anyone in the tsunami would really care or think what I said about a bunch of ignorant criminals was disrespectful in any way to their dead. As a matter of fact it had absolutely -no relation- to the dead what-so-ever. So really, you should be more careful in what your ass…I mean mouth says or you may find your foot accompaning it more frequently.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention, Qwerty. And I meant no hostility towards you, Martin, or your comment, just the stupidity of the gesture.
RabidKitten wrote:Yes, I have a comment or two. Firstly, not to sound mean, of course, but you need to learn the edit button.It was to bump the thread. At that stage I ddint know you were sick.RabidKitten wrote:The happenings on 9-11 are completely different than those of this tsunami. Firstly, the happenings on 9-11 were an attack, an act of war from another people who are honest to gods psychopaths. Poor souls who were propaganda’d to death into thinking some rather outragious things, but never the less, it was a concious thing that could have been prevented. So, asuming your comment was made in jest, it would have been perfectly ok because “they knew they lived in a danger area” or whatever? Are you honestly joking?RabidKitten wrote:It is a natural desaster, nothing can be done to prevent it, and these people -knew- they were in a tsunami area. That’s like people in Florida acting -surprised- when they get hit by a tropical storm or a hurricane. They know the risk and accept it. Because people living in a developing country have the choice of moving house (that is if they own one). That is an extremly ignorant thing to say rabid. Your basicly saying we and they shouldn’t be surprised because it was a “known tsunami area” (there are actually no “known” tsunami areas as a matter of fact). Your only images of third world countries is obviously very distorted and I can only asume it has been the product of the poor media and movies.RabidKitten wrote:My point was to bring to light the fact that it is a nothing, selfish gesture by people who are lower than scum by comparing it to something that is indeed a totally useless contribution.It’s actually not selfish as such. That is the whole point. An act of un-selfishness. I agree that its meaningless but that doesnt mean its selfish. Is lent selfish? Thats pretty bloody pointless and stupid in my opinion.Anyway, I see where u were comming from when u said what you said but I still disagree with you.
Qwerty wrote:It was to bump the thread. At that stage I ddint know you were sick.
The edit button does the same thing. Just so you know for future reference. At least it does as far as I know.Qwerty wrote:So, asuming your comment was made in jest, it would have been perfectly ok because “they knew they lived in a danger area” or whatever? Are you honestly joking?
Nope, doesn’t make it ok. If you recall, I was talking about how everyone fusses over this kind of natural tragety but then gives nothing and no concern over the man made ones in Rwanda. That and the world likes to pick and choose which areas to concern themselves with. Just saying that people are responsible for where they choose to live.Qwerty wrote:Because people living in a developing country have the choice of moving house (that is if they own one). That is an extremly ignorant thing to say rabid. Your basicly saying we and they shouldn’t be surprised because it was a “known tsunami area” (there are actually no “known” tsunami areas as a matter of fact). Your only images of third world countries is obviously very distorted and I can only asume it has been the product of the poor media and movies.
My views on third world countries has nothing to do with the view on this tragety, really. It just so happened that this tsunami was in a third world country, but concidering that you know nothing about my views on the ‘third world’ portions of the world, I would keep those hasty remarks to yourself.
Also, people being poor or in third world countries or even war torn countries doesn’t stop people from moving. There’s always the option of, oh, I don’t know, picking up and going somewhere else if you feel you’re in danger enough. Plenty of people all over the world, third world countries or not, that do it.
Once more, please do not make anymore hasty generalizations or assumptions about me or my views since you know absolutely nothing about either. It simply makes you look ignorant.Qwerty wrote:It’s actually not selfish as such. That is the whole point. An act of un-selfishness. I agree that its meaningless but that doesnt mean its selfish. Is lent selfish? Thats pretty bloody pointless and stupid in my opinion.
Yes, it is. See, it is a theory that nearly every act of charity is in essence a selfish act since people tend to only give when they can and not when it costs them something. Why do people give charity? Because they feel bad. So they do something in order to make themselves feel less ‘bad’ about what happened. It’s just like those “Send 9 cents a week for a child in a third world” commercials. How much of that money actually goes to the children, really? And really, there are much more meaningful ways to help people, but people find that throwing money at problems is easier than actually doing something that will matter. There are those who don’t just throw money at problems, but those people are few and far between and I tip my hat to them.
*laughs* Are you actually comparing Rapists, Murderers and Child Pornographers giving up cigarettes to Lent?? *Laughing* I’m sorry, but that’s just funny. First of all, Lent is a -religious- act…and religious acts in general tend to be things that people ‘just do’ because they ‘should’, of course, that’s how religion works for a majority of people anyway. The unfortunate syndrom of “Well my parents are this so I am also” or “I’ve been doing it since I was 3 so I’ll continue to even though I don’t give a crap about what it means”.
As for Lent being selfish, I don’t know, it could be seen as it. I don’t know, I find it hard to believe that God or Jesus or whoever doesn’t want people to eat meat for a certain amount of time on a certain day and to give something up. It just doesn’t seem to have much of a point behind it. So what purpose does it serve but self satisfaction that you’re doing something when really, you’re not. But I’m not here for a religious debate.
Lent is nothing like Rapists giving up cigarettes. And really, I don’t know why anyone would get upset on my suggestion of criminals giving up gang banging in the shower because if it’s “In honor and an unselfish act of sacrafice” as you suggest, then that makes it ok, in your definition, doesn’t it?Qwerty wrote:Anyway, I see where u were comming from when u said what you said but I still disagree with you.
That’s fine, you’re welcome to disagree. *shrug* Of course, really I’m saying that everything is overkill when it comes to natural trageties verses man made trageties. And also that people seem to think that it’s ok to pick and choose which natural trageties to help out with. Like I said, funny how people make a big deal out of this, but we just scoff and call people stupid when they live in tornado valley and have to rebuild their lives, or sit by and watch as florida’s torn apart again.
People everywhere have to take procautions for where they live. I put plastic up on my windows when winter hits. I try and get landscaping done when flood season comes around. I move people and things out of the attic and ready the basement when tornado season hits. And sometimes that’s just not enough and nature kicks your butt. Just how it happens. Not to say that it isn’t good to help those who need it, but the pick and choose stuff bothers me. But, as I said before and you gave me no credit for, at least people are banding together -some- of the time. It’s better than none of the time, I imagine. Just irritates me that the world turned it into a pissing contest by yelling at the US, specifically.But, as a side note, I like how you pick and choose what to comment about and completely ignore anything else I had to say. I also like how nearly every comment from you is calling me “Stupid” “Ignorant” or my views “Distorted” or “pointless”. You obviously need a lesson in how to not make yourself sound discrediting when discussing a topic. Namecalling is a fallacy and really only makes you seem unintelligent. Also, the terms “Pointless” and “Distorted” are really subjective. Who decides what is pointless or distorted. Or really what is stupid or ignorant for that matter. So many things are subjective in the world and ideas that are purely subjective, so that is why people try to stay away from namecalling and also snap judgements and final judgements in discussions. It’s all subjective.
At least when I called names, it was about criminals in the UK who thought that giving up cigarettes (By the way, a product that only causes discomfort and death in those who use it and those who are around those who use it). So really, giving the properties of cigarettes, it was -better- for the criminals to give them up. Oh no, what a self sacrafice, I’m getting healthy! AH! The pain, the suffering! Maybe a better parody would’ve been Heroin Addicts giving up syringes in honor. Or perhaps to push it further, that mobidly obese people joined the YMCA and took up jogging in honor of them.*snickers*just to put in my two cents on the topic… i think a few of us (myself included, the first time i read through it) missed the line that the prisoners “donated money to the Tsunami relief fund”. martin, correct me if i’m wrong, but does that mean they gave up smoking and donated the money they would otherwise have used to buy their cigs? if so, then it makes the act slightly more meaningful. not that i particularly care what criminals do (in any part of the world), but its something more than just giving up smoking.
and yes, rabidkitten – i’ve heard of that theory about selfish charity, and personally i believe it. to what *degree* is it true, who knows, but it makes sense.
and these people -knew- they were in a tsunami area.
Actually i think you’ll find that they didn’t, the area where the tsunami hit is completely different from somewhere like florida where there are frequent tornados, as far as the vast majority of people in these areas knew, there was no risk, it wasn’t a tsunami area, it was just somewhere that happened to be beside the sea or on an island and by a fluke was the victim of a tsunami, it wasn’t stupidity or anything like that, there was no choice to be able to move away from the tsunami area because of the danger, because as far as they knew there wasn’t even the remotest possibility of danger, no concious risk was taken, like in your examples of building a house on a cliff etc…
As for some of your point i agree with you people should be more concerned with the day to day suffering of the countless people suffering, but thats life, the support given to the tsunami victims saved lives and has done a lot of good, it doesnt matter how selfish those doing the giving were it saved peoples lives, and the people who were aided don’t care who selfish the people doing the giving are only that they are helped.
Also, people being poor or in third world countries or even war torn countries doesn’t stop people from moving. There’s always the option of, oh, I don’t know, picking up and going somewhere else if you feel you’re in danger enough. Plenty of people all over the world, third world countries or not, that do it.
And as for people having a choice as to where they live… largely people in the 3rd world DON’T have the choice as to where they live, they live where they were born and where they can survive, and often by the time a danger is apparent it is impossible to move elsewhere, and when they try they often end up in terrible conditions. Other countries don’t want all the thousands of people who leave places of danger, once you are stuck in a war zone it is very difficult to leave, and if you do leave you often end up stuck in a refugee camp, which can sometimes be as bad as the place you left.
And i’d agree that 9/11 and the tsunami shouldn’t be compared… they aren’t even on the same scale, the tsunami was a disaster of huge proportions… while 9/11 in the grand scheme of things wasn’t.
RabidKitten wrote:I was talking about how everyone fusses over this kind of natural tragety but then gives nothing and no concern over the man made ones in Rwanda. That and the world likes to pick and choose which areas to concern themselves with.I’l admit my knowledge is very minimal on Rwanda so i’ll just asume it’s similar to Somalia. It’s very hard for foreign powers to intervine with another country’s civil war and the UN’s powers are somwhat limited. I don’t know much about the Rwanda genocides so i’ll stop there.RabidKitten wrote:My views on third world countries has nothing to do with the view on this tragety, really. It just so happened that this tsunami was in a third world country, but concidering that you know nothing about my views on the ‘third world’ portions of the world, I would keep those hasty remarks to yourself.
Also, people being poor or in third world countries or even war torn countries doesn’t stop people from moving. There’s always the option of, oh, I don’t know, picking up and going somewhere else if you feel you’re in danger enough. Plenty of people all over the world, third world countries or not, that do it.
Once more, please do not make anymore hasty generalizations or assumptions about me or my views since you know absolutely nothing about either. It simply makes you look ignorant.Once again, that is an extremly unfair and ignorant thing to say. People in third world countries struggle to survive in some instances let alone move house because there is a possibility that one day a Tsunami could come. And asuming they could, where the hell would they move? Saying “they knew the risks” is really, just a plain dumb thing to say. Let’s go back to your precious Rwanda for example. They can’t just get up and move can they? If they can, why do you care? Why should we care? Apparenty, according to yourself, they can just move. Can’t they?:rolleyes:RabidKitten wrote:Yes, it is. See, it is a theory that nearly every act of charity is in essence a selfish act since people tend to only give when they can and not when it costs them something. Why do people give charity? Because they feel bad. So they do something in order to make themselves feel less ‘bad’ about what happened. It’s just like those “Send 9 cents a week for a child in a third world” commercials. How much of that money actually goes to the children, really? And really, there are much more meaningful ways to help people, but people find that throwing money at problems is easier than actually doing something that will matter. There are those who don’t just throw money at problems, but those people are few and far between and I tip my hat to them. So we shouldn’t donate money because it’s an act of selfishness? Do you think the people and governments recieving the money really care? Or should we juts stop donating, all stop working and move to east asia just so we can do something but “throw money at the problem”?RabidKitten wrote:Lent is nothing like Rapists giving up cigarettes.What if a rapist gives up cigarettes for lent?;)RabidKitten wrote:The edit button does the same thing. Just so you know for future reference. At least it does as far as I know.Nope, doesn’t make it ok. If you recall, I was talking about how everyone fusses over this kind of natural tragety but then gives nothing and no concern over the man made ones in Rwanda. That and the world likes to pick and choose which areas to concern themselves with. Just saying that people are responsible for where they choose to live.
My views on third world countries has nothing to do with the view on this tragety, really. It just so happened that this tsunami was in a third world country, but concidering that you know nothing about my views on the ‘third world’ portions of the world, I would keep those hasty remarks to yourself.
Also, people being poor or in third world countries or even war torn countries doesn’t stop people from moving. There’s always the option of, oh, I don’t know, picking up and going somewhere else if you feel you’re in danger enough. Plenty of people all over the world, third world countries or not, that do it.
Once more, please do not make anymore hasty generalizations or assumptions about me or my views since you know absolutely nothing about either. It simply makes you look ignorant.Yes, it is. See, it is a theory that nearly every act of charity is in essence a selfish act since people tend to only give when they can and not when it costs them something. Why do people give charity? Because they feel bad. So they do something in order to make themselves feel less ‘bad’ about what happened. It’s just like those “Send 9 cents a week for a child in a third world” commercials. How much of that money actually goes to the children, really? And really, there are much more meaningful ways to help people, but people find that throwing money at problems is easier than actually doing something that will matter. There are those who don’t just throw money at problems, but those people are few and far between and I tip my hat to them.
*laughs* Are you actually comparing Rapists, Murderers and Child Pornographers giving up cigarettes to Lent?? *Laughing* I’m sorry, but that’s just funny. First of all, Lent is a -religious- act…and religious acts in general tend to be things that people ‘just do’ because they ‘should’, of course, that’s how religion works for a majority of people anyway. The unfortunate syndrom of “Well my parents are this so I am also” or “I’ve been doing it since I was 3 so I’ll continue to even though I don’t give a crap about what it means”.
As for Lent being selfish, I don’t know, it could be seen as it. I don’t know, I find it hard to believe that God or Jesus or whoever doesn’t want people to eat meat for a certain amount of time on a certain day and to give something up. It just doesn’t seem to have much of a point behind it. So what purpose does it serve but self satisfaction that you’re doing something when really, you’re not. But I’m not here for a religious debate.
Lent is nothing like Rapists giving up cigarettes. And really, I don’t know why anyone would get upset on my suggestion of criminals giving up gang banging in the shower because if it’s “In honor and an unselfish act of sacrafice” as you suggest, then that makes it ok, in your definition, doesn’t it?That’s fine, you’re welcome to disagree. *shrug* Of course, really I’m saying that everything is overkill when it comes to natural trageties verses man made trageties. And also that people seem to think that it’s ok to pick and choose which natural trageties to help out with. Like I said, funny how people make a big deal out of this, but we just scoff and call people stupid when they live in tornado valley and have to rebuild their lives, or sit by and watch as florida’s torn apart again..It’s diferent. Cyclones come through florida maybe every 3 or 4 years. How many times do we have a Tsunami? Last major one was 5 or 6 years ago and they could strike any coast, not just on plate boundaries.
RabidKitten wrote:I also like how nearly every comment from you is calling me “Stupid” “Ignorant” or my views “Distorted” or “pointless”. You obviously need a lesson in how to not make yourself sound discrediting when discussing a topic.I never actually called you stupid, ignorant. I did say your views were some what distorted, as they, still, quite obviously are. That in mind, I also did not revert to “name calling” as you acused me of. Pherhaps you would like to re-read what I wrote before pouncing.After saying all that I still can’t comprehend how you could say “they knew the risks”. I mean come on! Everytime you get in the car you know the risks but lets pretend you have an accident and need surgery you can’t afford. Let’s not donate cause you knew the risks!:eek: How’s that sounds?
It’s unfortunate that the “world” picks and chooses where to help people and where not to but that’s life. Just like for another 60 years we are going to be constantly reminded about the jews in world war 2 when very little of the developed world could name a greater genocide in the world history when there are plenty.
So what do you want me to do Rabid? Donate? Not donate? Stop what i’m doing here and go help out in Indonesia? Tell me? I don’t know? What should people do? Huh?
Oh, and so now you need me to tell you what to do? You don’t believe that the people of the world have a mind of their own and need to be told what to do, or some such a thing? Really, if you expect an answer on how to live your life, you’re best asking someone else.
I’m not telling anyone what to do, but simply saying that people think that throwing money at anything is a solution. It’s not my job to go and say what anyone should do, it’s all an opinion that you took entirely too far with a simple comment made about stupid crimnals in the UK that gave up cigarettes.
As for people moving in Rwanda, yes, they tried beforehand and many did escape. And many tried to move during and were murdered and killed and hunted out, but at least they tried. And many survived by hiding out and actually doing something other than sitting in their homes waiting to be murdered. See, my whole point was not to simply up and move whenever a problem comes about, but to -do- something about it. People are far often too wiling to become victims when they know better.
As for ‘not being able to’ just because they’re poor or in undeveloped areas or because they might loose what they have or whatnot, nothing is impossible. Not a damned thing, not a single bitty physical thing that someone can do is impossible. Highly imporbable, yes, but not impossible, especially not in a simple case like moving where you live. There are ways of living that people can sustain themselves with, just nobody wants to take. Hell, people living in suers and in ditches and in laundry and in portapotties and in deserts and marshes and snow and sleet and ice and cold and hot just in order to simply live before. In times of war people have given up -everything- in order to just pick themselves up and start walking when the times were bad enough. Hell, in any country it’s hard to pick up and leave, live on the streets, live in a ditch, live in a hole, in a cave, whatever, the point is that people do it in order to live. *shrug* Times get hard enough, people will do anything to live. And don’t think I’m sitting here talking about this stuff on top of a fluffy cloud, either, but this isn’t about me. People can do some crazy things just in order to live, and sacrafice a lot of things just in order to live.
And as for Getting into a car wreck, I personally can’t think of a single time I’ve known of anyone who’s gotten into a car wreck and had anyone donate anything to them. Hell, when I was run over by a car, I didn’t have anyone willing to help me. When a child at my school was in a car wreck and had to have surgery or he’d die, guess what, he died because he couldn’t afford it. So really, that’s a really bad example you gave. After all, when was the last time you helped someone get surgery. When was the last time you donated to cancer research. When was the last time you donated your body in order for the hospital to do tests. When was the last time you sat out in the freezing cold with a can and a bell for a charity. I can name all the times I did, and I really don’t even expect an answer, they’re rhetorical.
And here you are talking about “That’s just life”. Yeah, exactly, that is just life. And life happens, doesn’t it? And sometimes people help, but most of the time you’re on your own. It is up to each individual person to be on alert and to be there for themselves and watch out for their own well being. Everyone takes risks, no matter how benign, but 9 out of 10 times, who is there when something goes wrong? 99 out of 100 times, who is there when something goes wrong? How about…nobody. Very very few who are personally involved sometimes, but do we have a pancake breakfast everytime someone’s in a car wreck? Is there a bake sale whenever a child is brutalised? Do we send random money to the millions of people in need all year round? No.
The point of all of this is how funny it is that people seem to think it’s alright to help some, but not others. And even then, the only help they seem to give is cash, when what they need is man power, or a good laugh, or how about just someone to talk to. People the world over choose and pick who they help, when they help, and even the time of year that is more ‘appropriate’ to help, and it’s pathetic. But when it comes down to it, in the very very beginning, it involves a person, and their choices. The risks they find they can live with, the risks they find they can not live with and what they’re willing to do about it. I’m not telling anyone to do, I’m just making an observation, it’s your choice what to do with it.
And strange how this all came from a single satirical comment about criminals in some random prison giving up cigarettes that nobody seemed to be able to grasp.
RabidKitten wrote:Oh, and so now you need me to tell you what to do? You don’t believe that the people of the world have a mind of their own and need to be told what to do, or some such a thing? Really, if you expect an answer on how to live your life, you’re best asking someone else.Everybody has an opinon, I was simply asking for yours. No need to cut sick at me.RabidKitten wrote:I’m not telling anyone what to do, but simply saying that people think that throwing money at anything is a solution.Well actually, beleive it or not, it is. Money makes the world go ’round as they say. Money can buy anything if you have enough. Granted, it’s not always the best or only solution but it’s definetly a big help.RabidKitten wrote:As for people moving in Rwanda, yes, they tried beforehand and many did escape. And many tried to move during and were murdered and killed and hunted out, but at least they tried. And many survived by hiding out and actually doing something other than sitting in their homes waiting to be murdered. See, my whole point was not to simply up and move whenever a problem comes about, but to -do- something about it. People are far often too wiling to become victims when they know better.So your some big Rwanda expert huh? Got any more examples? I’m curious as to where you got all this info from as well. (Of course im not discrediting it in any way)RabidKitten wrote:As for ‘not being able to’ just because they’re poor or in undeveloped areas or because they might loose what they have or whatnot, nothing is impossible. Not a damned thing, not a single bitty physical thing that someone can do is impossible. Highly imporbable, yes, but not impossible, especially not in a simple case like moving where you live. There are ways of living that people can sustain themselves with, just nobody wants to take. Hell, people living in suers and in ditches and in laundry and in portapotties and in deserts and marshes and snow and sleet and ice and cold and hot just in order to simply live before. In times of war people have given up -everything- in order to just pick themselves up and start walking when the times were bad enough. Hell, in any country it’s hard to pick up and leave, live on the streets, live in a ditch, live in a hole, in a cave, whatever, the point is that people do it in order to live. *shrug* Times get hard enough, people will do anything to live. And don’t think I’m sitting here talking about this stuff on top of a fluffy cloud, either, but this isn’t about me. People can do some crazy things just in order to live, and sacrafice a lot of things just in order to live.Once again, as I have already mentioned, why should people move because there is a slight, slight probability that a big wave may coem in the future. Aceh, one of the hardest hit places, was a prosperous fishing disctrict. Bascily, what your saying, is that because there was a probablitly that they could be washed away living so close to the coast, it serves them right for not moving away from the coast where they would have had to live with less money and less food. (Keeping in mind they already lived in a developing country, its not as if they wernt struggling already.)RabidKitten wrote:And as for Getting into a car wreck, I personally can’t think of a single time I’ve known of anyone who’s gotten into a car wreck and had anyone donate anything to them. Hell, when I was run over by a car, I didn’t have anyone willing to help me. When a child at my school was in a car wreck and had to have surgery or he’d die, guess what, he died because he couldn’t afford it. So really, that’s a really bad example you gave.Is it? Let’s keep in mind we both live in different places. Pherhaps I just live in a frendlier, more close knit place. Im sorry thats what its like where you live. Or maybe I shouldnt be sorry, pherhaps it’s your fault because you can always get up and move!RabidKitten wrote:After all, when was the last time you helped someone get surgery. When was the last time you donated to cancer research. When was the last time you donated your body in order for the hospital to do tests. When was the last time you sat out in the freezing cold with a can and a bell for a charity. I can name all the times I did, and I really don’t even expect an answer, they’re rhetorical.What are you talking about? You don’t expect an answer? Please explain?And btw, if your going to start talking about how much of a big shot you are because you pester people for money with your tin shaking, I was actually in Africa doing community service when the tsunami hit. It even hit the country I was in (not many people died though).
RabidKitten wrote:And here you are talking about “That’s just life”. Yeah, exactly, that is just life. And life happens, doesn’t it? And sometimes people help, but most of the time you’re on your own. It is up to each individual person to be on alert and to be there for themselves and watch out for their own well being. Everyone takes risks, no matter how benign, but 9 out of 10 times, who is there when something goes wrong? 99 out of 100 times, who is there when something goes wrong? How about…nobody. Very very few who are personally involved sometimes, but do we have a pancake breakfast everytime someone’s in a car wreck? Is there a bake sale whenever a child is brutalised? Do we send random money to the millions of people in need all year round? No.Yeah, your right. And as I said “that’s life” as you pointed out but what is your point? Do you want me to disagree with you or soemthing? I don’t get it?RabidKitten wrote:The point of all of this is how funny it is that people seem to think it’s alright to help some, but not others. And even then, the only help they seem to give is cash, when what they need is man power, or a good laugh, or how about just someone to talk to. People the world over choose and pick who they help, when they help, and even the time of year that is more ‘appropriate’ to help, and it’s pathetic. But when it comes down to it, in the very very beginning, it involves a person, and their choices. The risks they find they can live with, the risks they find they can not live with and what they’re willing to do about it. I’m not telling anyone to do, I’m just making an observation, it’s your choice what to do with it.OK. It really is a matter of the media, magnitude and distance though. Theres a lot of things people just plain don’t know about (eg Rwanda) untill the media or other such large scale source informs them (eg: Hotel Rwanda). This will always be the case though, why should people research things such as people needing help or getting killed? And on the same topic, what would money do to help the Rwanda cause? Money was given to the Tsunami governments because they could use it to rebuild. Who would we give money to in Rwanda? It would just be another Somalia.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.