artyone, Sadly, comparing Canterbury and the West Coast reveals what would have become of this country if we hadn’t replaced trees with pastures. No people and no money. Too bad if you’re one of those people dependent on that money, and who of us isn’t, ultimately, inthis country today?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Until we have firmer evidence it will be business as usual.
jh

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Pimping Dairy! that’s good Phil. I do agree. The dairy and sheep farms our country is covered with are an open sore. The lands de-nuded and made to into meat factories. I so wish the abattoir aristocracy would realise that trees always look better on land than grass.

Yeah man, the truth of politics. My father always said that politics is merely the art of the possible but over time I’d have to say that politics is the art of the fallible.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

At the moment an argument can be made (is being made) that peak oil is off on a distant horizon. Predictions are based on a lot of unknowns. Right now OPEC (say’s it) has spare capacity, but there is a lack of refineries.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4125442a6026.html
Not finished
jh

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

BB

The people in Iraq are doing just that, fighting fire-with-fire. Oh wait, you mean for the WEST to start bombing the cr@p out of innocent people? Well the USA would have to STOP before it would be able to start… it seems sometimes that our number one export is expensive high-explosives air freighted directly to their destination. The address for delivery is unfortunately, coming out of a corrupted database.

This problem that should never have been, became as big and nasty and ugly as it is because it is a coming together of two memes. The first is the need/greed for oil on the part of Cheney & co. They want the oil the unfortunate people of Iraq happen to live on top of. The second is the real desire of Osama Bin Forgotten to foment a state of war between Islam and the West, bringing Islam together against a common enemy.

After 9-11 the correct strategy was not the grammatically perverted “war on terror” but a pursuit of criminals. This MAY have necessitated the actions in Afghanistan and indeed the world saw some justification for removing the Taliban and trying to bring that government up to scratch. Failing to pursue that effort is basically criminal negligence on the part of the USA.

It never EVER justified invading Iraq and indeed the treatment of the Iraqi people is one of the reasons that Iran shifted back into the control of the Mullahs.

Pursuing criminals, according people their proper civil rights and holding real trials would have been longer and more drawn out. It would have also saved over a hundred thousand lives, prevented Iran from troubling the West with a nuclear option, quite likely would’ve captured Osama Bin Laden and would have prevented the polarization that the current policy has created both internally and globally.

All that the “war on terror” got us was a photo-op of Bush in a flight suit as though he knew something about war.

respectfully
BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

BB

The people behind the terrorist attacks are both extremists not representatives of mainstream Muslims and supported by Middle East Governments who are generally dictatorships in order to redirect their peoples aggrevation over social, political, and economic problems. Typical tactics of demagogues who seek to retain their hold on power.

For most Muslims the acts of the terrorists are about as representative as those of the Unibomber and arbortion clinic bombers are of anarchist and Christians.

Oh you mean these celebrations?
http://www.answers.com/topic/celebrations-of-the-september-11-2001-attacks

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I read some statistics saying that a large majority want iran to vow not to try to possess nuclear weapons in excange for foreign aid, and something like 70% want a peafeful dialogue with the west. If america invades iran like it did iraq, then that majority is gonna go downhill, fast.

“What conservatives say when they think the liberals aren’t listening”
http://www.alternet.org/stories/57001/?page=1

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Sleepy

As soon as the Muslims care about the carnage they are causing in the western world (in the name of their god) I will start to care about the Iranians, until then I want the western leaders to take a pro active stance with these madmen.

Should innocent people die you can guarantee that we in the western world will not be dancing in the street in celebration unlike our eastern “friends”

In short I could not care, I want a world free of Islamo terrorists, it is about time that the west started fighting fire with fire.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Interesting comment on Kiwiblog:

Simo Says:
July 16th, 2007 at 11:45 am

“TV3 ran this story on Friday last with the usual falling icebergs, they need a phone call, the news editor needs a bullet, and John Campbell needs a decent set of heels to mimick the trash that eminates from his gob”

Makes ya wonder doesn’t it?
jh

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

BB.

You’re not the only one happy about a proposed invasion of Iran as the linked article demonstrates, but I’d suggest you read some of the responses from Iranians who are actually living there. Bear in mind that some of those people may be killed, mutilated, and/or lose loved ones as a result of American military “intervention”.

http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=30fb483e534a69e297a79006b0fd3f21

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

There’s a discussion on about peak Oil at Kiwi Blog. It is a doozey as it has bought several hairy beast out of their lair
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/07/peak_oil.html
jh

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

http://www.voltairenet.org/article146942.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Excellent link bj, alarming.

It’s time to paraphrase George Santayana: “Those who would ignore current events are doomed to repeat them.” It’s not too late to prevent a disastrous attack on Iran, but time is growing short. And current events may repeat themselves very soon.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Kevyn

There’s more to this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/lieberman-lays-the-ground_b_56093.html

“Predictably, the Lieberman measure passed 97-0. But it’s not the reporting requirements themselves that are dangerous – it’s the amendment’s language. It lists a hodgepodge of undocumented and inflammatory accusations before stating that “the murder of members of the United States Armed Forces by a foreign government or its agents is an intolerable and unacceptable act of hostility against the United States by the foreign government in question.” (See “Update,” below.) These are words that invite an act of war against Iran, even in the absence of clear evidence of involvement.”

Can you say “Gulf of Tonkin” ?

Lieberman is a cagey operator and no friend to peace…. and the war powers act remains a toothless doormat for the administration to use as it pleases.

respectfully
BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

SleepyTreehugger, The full story adds this line:

The message Lieberman said the NATO and EU officials conveyed to him is that Israel should “prevent the threat herself.�

Sounds more like NATO and EU told them to bugger off and Lieberman interpreted their words with a commendable degree of creativity even for a politician.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Sleepy

I hope you are right.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

The early phase of war on Iran will soon begin guys.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0707/S00206.htm

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Sam raises a valid point. Tim Flannery, an Australian environmentalist, pointed out in one of his books that eating kangaroo meat was probably more sustainable than eating Australian grown wheat. Of course, you know which food item is most controversial.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

“this answers the question..can you eart meat..and be an environmentalist..?”

Yup – check out just about any traditional sustainable society and you’ll find meat eating. Most of the environmental arguments against meat eating are actually arguments against certain forms of production – vegetables produced in large-scale capital intensive mono-cultures are equally bad for the planet (for example, every kilo of the Aussie wheat we make our bread out of has cost 7kg of soil gone down the river, not to mention all the pesticides and fertilisers thrown at it).

Traditional small scale meat production generally relied on having animals to use up surpluses and waste products – hence the popularity of goats, chickens and pigs. My suggestion is to take up hunting – eat a goat for the planet.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

This is related to the issue of high fuel prices. Some of you may be aware of, or have seen, the controversial documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle”, which has screened in the UK and Australia. One of the arguments against renewable energy put forward in the documentary is that renewable energy is too expensive for the developing world, and forcing carbon dioxide reductions on poor countries will condemn them to eternal poverty.

I have just read an interesting press release from the Tongan government which seems to refute the idea that renewable energy is too expensive for developing nations. One of the problems facing Pacific Islands is the high price of fuel. In the case of Tonga, renewable energy (in particular solar electricity) is seen as a way to reduce the costs of energy, not increase them as the “Great Global Warming Swindle” argues. Here is the link:

http://www.pmo.gov.to/artman/publish/article_460.shtml

Whether or not substantive action will be taken is another issue, but the press release does imply that renewable energy is cost effective for many developing countries right now.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)