World is Overpopulated We Need A War

We just have to manage how we use our resources. The OPs and the disgusting nuke war fan are quitters. All that would happen would be that humanity would repeat its mistakes having learned nothing. We, the people of the world, will learn balance with each other and with our environment through adapting and improving as we have always done. It is happening now.

The planet is in fact overpopulated, and some sort of depopulation efforts need to be put into effect.

The simple minded folks always seem to retort with "start with yourself", or some other ridiculous comment.

The population is continuing to grow, and the planet can only sustain so many people.

Natural disasters would be the easiest action to take in an effort to depopulate certain areas, but we just can't count on those as being reliable.

Originally posted by stikkinikki
We just have to manage how we use our resources. The OPs and the disgusting nuke war fan are quitters. All that would happen would be that humanity would repeat its mistakes having learned nothing. We, the people of the world, will learn balance with each other and with our environment through adapting and improving as we have always done. It is happening now.

Thats Utopian thinking there. The fact is we only have enough resources to last us another thousand years Max. We have spent 4000 years trying to do what you are saying and humans still cant get along even though we are as civilized as we are. The fact is we need to kill and we need to kill now. Greed has gotten in the way we have the tech for renewable energy and we dont use it why? Money. So if people had to wake up to the fact that we either need to kill 3/4 of the population or start using renewable resources .... What I am saying is this is a wake up call.

reply to post by Scorched Earth


The human population is no different than any other animal population in regards to being suseptible to disease and virus especially when in close quarters. This is the most likely natural control that will happen. If sea levels rise over the coming decades even if just by inches or a foot or two large catastrophic deaths would occur in areas of low land by the sea. A collapse of the worldwide economy could be devestating for communities that rely on massive infrastructure.

We don't need to go bombing or shooting anyone.

Originally posted by Scorched Earth
The planet is in fact overpopulated, and some sort of depopulation efforts need to be put into effect.

The simple minded folks always seem to retort with "start with yourself", or some other ridiculous comment.

The population is continuing to grow, and the planet can only sustain so many people.

Natural disasters would be the easiest action to take in an effort to depopulate certain areas, but we just can't count on those as being reliable.

We cant rely on natural disasters they take to long. We need a good war between all the countries and let it go for 10 years or so. Kill armies, citizens, government. Mass kill till we get to 500 million or so. Or the other option of course is renewable resources but no body wants to do this because there is no money in it and people dont want to push their governments. So lets get some good genocide action going maybe this will wake people up.

Thanks guys, for exposing environmentalism for what it is.

You guys on the left are usually the ones proponent of man as cancer on this planet. Environmentalism is rife with misanthropes who loathe man, and his attempt to try to better his lot.

This is what environmentalism is, to its core full of contempt for man. Also beneath the veiled "depopulation" agenda and agenda of forcing the use of renewable resource on others is tainted with racism, and bigotry.

This is why most intellectuals have long since abandoned this, fascist/leftist/socialist one world view.



[edit on 7-8-2008 by Gateway]

reply to post by stikkinikki


We also certainly dont need to be providing food, medical, or financial aid to nations that cannot provide for themselves. Why prolong the inevitable?

reply to post by WeNeedAWar


The logical fallacy is that war would do what we need and that is to reduce population stress on the planet. Wars kill indiscriminately and often kill the best and brightest. That is something we do not need. We need our best and brightest for galactic colonization projects which we should be engaged in instead of war making. If we dedicate our resources to space exploration and colonization instead of war making we have enough resources to extend our civilization out into the stars easily.

Originally posted by Gateway
Thanks guys,

You guys on the left are usually the ones proponent of man as cancer on this planet. Environmentalism is rife with misanthrope who loathe man, and his lot to try to better himself.

This is what environmentalism is, to its core full of contempt for man. Also beneath the veiled "depopulation" agenda and agenda of forcing the use of renewable resource on others is tainted with racism, and bigotry.

No racism here kill all races equally. Call it environmentalism or whatever you want the fact is our resources are going to be gone and the only fathomable way to save what we have left is to kill in mass. I know it sucks but its the truth.

Originally posted by Scorched Earth
The planet is in fact overpopulated, and some sort of depopulation efforts need to be put into effect.

The simple minded folks always seem to retort with "start with yourself", or some other ridiculous comment.

The population is continuing to grow, and the planet can only sustain so many people.

Natural disasters would be the easiest action to take in an effort to depopulate certain areas, but we just can't count on those as being reliable.

Wow, this looks like the beginning of a "Posting Gang" with you and the original poster's mentality showing that you want nothing more than war, and to call people that make comments about other people seeing the uselessness of war and the "need" for war in order to control the population because it's "growing out of control" through the self-perpetuating cycle of idiocy of people in Washington D.C. shows your lack of understanding for the cost of humanity to endlessly send soldiers off to war where people die because of some jerk in a suit hiding behind a podium is lieing to the populace.

Anyone who promotes war has no knowledge of history, no knowledge of how politics works, and no knowledge of life itself. To promote a war to end lives is stupid and innane in that there are a multitude of other things to do in order to make the populace spread out, like space colonization, or pushing the populace out into the areas that are still wild, where people can spread out more.

[edit on 7-8-2008 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


Evidently you enjoy seeing things that aren't there. I never promoted war.

Reading comprehension works wonders

Originally posted by WeNeedAWar

Originally posted by stikkinikki
We just have to manage how we use our resources. The OPs and the disgusting nuke war fan are quitters. All that would happen would be that humanity would repeat its mistakes having learned nothing. We, the people of the world, will learn balance with each other and with our environment through adapting and improving as we have always done. It is happening now.

Thats Utopian thinking there. The fact is we only have enough resources to last us another thousand years Max. We have spent 4000 years trying to do what you are saying and humans still cant get along even though we are as civilized as we are. The fact is we need to kill and we need to kill now. Greed has gotten in the way we have the tech for renewable energy and we dont use it why? Money. So if people had to wake up to the fact that we either need to kill 3/4 of the population or start using renewable resources .... What I am saying is this is a wake up call.

I call BS. I've studied wildlife populations and nature checks itself. We are nowhere near the apex of human potential. Your Utopia is to call it quits - cut and run. That's for losers. Your presentation is horrible and will only frighten people you present it to. Try using hope and keeping your eye on the prize.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


The difference is the politicians want thsi for greed. So they can line their own pockets. i want the mass killing so we can save the earth and the human race. There is a difference.

Originally posted by Scorched Earth
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

Evidently you enjoy seeing things that aren't there. I never promoted war.

Reading comprehension works wonders

It's called reading between the lines with your comments, as well as the mentality behind what you've said in conjunction with the original poster.

I'm not delusional nor seeing things, the original poster though must be.

Originally posted by WeNeedAWar
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

The difference is the politicians want thsi for greed. So they can line their own pockets. i want the mass killing so we can save the earth and the human race. There is a difference.

I see. So, Ghandi, you're promoting war for peaceful means?

Yeah, try again. I'm not buying it. There's no reason for war, ever.

[edit on 7-8-2008 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

The Earth can exist without humankind on it at all. If life were destroyed down to the last microbe it would grow back in a few billion years and not even notice that it was ever troubled with our habitation. You are not interested in saving the planet. This 500 million stuff is straight Georgia guide stones globalist scaremonger rubbish.

Originally posted by Scorched Earth
reply to post by stikkinikki

 

We also certainly dont need to be providing food, medical, or financial aid to nations that cannot provide for themselves. Why prolong the inevitable?

That is a good point except I don't know what is inevitable and where. We let religion preach that condoms and other birth control were a sin. Now we reap the whirlwind of being ignorant of the real human costs of those beliefs.

We need to learn about our footprint and what we demand of the Earth in order to conform into the medias idea of being "comfortable".

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


It's called seeing what you want to see, not what I actually said. I never advocated war. I simply think all forms of aid must be stopped and we must let nature take its course.

The survival of the planet, and humankind depends on it.

Originally posted by Scorched Earth
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

It's called seeing what you want to see, not what I actually said. I never advocated war. I simply think all forms of aid must be stopped and we must let nature take its course.

The survival of the planet, and humankind depends on it.

Good point. That could be another step in our quest of world depopulation. Quit giving aid and helping the world. Let them fend for themselves. Good idea. Its good to have someone on my sick level.

reply to post by stikkinikki


Very good point about religion. It is one of the chief causes of overpopulation, and more importantly, one of the biggest problems ever to descend upon mankind.

If anything, the populations of westernized nations need to stop growing through immigration. All of it must be stopped for a period of at least 10 years. The U.S. simply cannot withstand the human tidal wave headed our way.

reply to post by WeNeedAWar


I am not on your level. Nuking countries is the easy, yet stupid way out.

I await the cries of racism, but lets be realistic here: Africa is basically useless. Not in any way due to the race of its inhabitants, but they are the planets welfare child. Simply stopping all aid to that continent would do wonders to reduce the population.

Let China do as they wish with their one child policy. I personally believe its a good idea, but our Constitution forbids that policy here. Since it does so, the only way to reduce our national population is to halt all forms of immigration by whatever means necessary.