Greenpeace vs. Japanese Whalers WHO WILL WIN?

  • News
  • Thread starter Mk
  • Start date
  • #26
Anttech said:
Considering the UK has what 10 at a streach Nuclear power plants, banning them wouldnt put the UK back in the dark ages. What it would do would "Focus" Science on finding a safer renewable energy source.. For Example the Sun.
I dont aggree with everything they stand for, but they are a force for good more often than not... Focusing the media on issues that we need to deal with.. FOr example Global warming, They have been harping on about this for Years!!! Now only do we deside it is a problem...
GreenPeace are NOT communists.. Come on they believe in stopping Globalisation ruining the world, not in authoritarian regiems..
Most of the Greenpeace voters I know are stoned out of there minds most of the time to become dictors :rofl:
Focus? FOCUS?? What in God's name does that bloody phrase mean? 'oooh, we must focus on renewables'. Bollocks, we already have a carbon-neutral clean, efficient, safe and cheap (compared to renewables) method of power production and if greenpeace want to eschew it then they're welcome to do that but anybody with half a brain cell realises it's a load of honk. Building a 200MW wind plant at the same cost as a 2GW nuclear plant is just insanity.

And if you believe globalisation is ruining the world then I sincerely suggest you read some proper economic literature and not the junk shovelled out by greenpeace.

And Britain currently makes up 20% of it's energy production through nuclear power - by 2020 that will have dropped to 0% - a defecit that will mainly be made up through coal and gas fired power stations. This is pure lunacy and wholly against the stated aims of greenpeace, yet they will have just as large a part of the blame if global warming really does get out of control and we don't utilise nuclear power to stop it. Renewable energy sources are just too uneconomical and too inneficient to provide anything like 20% of a large nation's power consumption, yet alone 100%. Nuclear fusion is still on the horizon and it seems unlikely we'll develop a method of power generation that runs of greenpeace's inflated sense of self esteem, so we have to utilise nuclear power. It's thise blind bloody-minded dogmatic crap from greenpeace about how nuclear power is 'evil' which really pisses me off the most - I can only show comtempt for any organisation that gets the facts so blatantly wrong and are so blind to scientific reasoning.

Being anti-globalisation is inherenly anti-free trade and pro-protectionism. Forcing the closure of nuclear plants, banning their construction and solely building reneable power plants (at great expense to the taxpayer. I'm serious in saying that if Britain were to fuel it's energy demands solely through wind power our economy would collapse completely due to the massive cost and inevitable power cuts on calm days) is anti-capitalist as it means the state has absolute control over the industry, completely eschewing the market. Ditto for agriculture as Greenpeace believe in practically banning imports due to the pollition caused during their transport. Greenpeace believe in coercing people to follow their line, at the very least their policies are inherently socialist and utterly authoritarian, at worst they're quasi-terrorists who stop at nothing to acheive their aims.
 
  • #27
221
0
Focus? FOCUS?? What in God's name does that bloody phrase mean? 'oooh, we must focus on renewables'. Bollocks, we already have a carbon-neutral clean, efficient, safe and cheap (compared to renewables) method of power production and if greenpeace want to eschew it then they're welcome to do that but anybody with half a brain cell realises it's a load of honk. Building a 200MW wind plant at the same cost as a 2GW nuclear plant is just insanity.

And if you believe globalisation is ruining the world then I sincerely suggest you read some proper economic literature and not the junk shovelled out by greenpeace.
You obviously do not know how to put your brain in gear! Please dont presume to know anything about me!

I never said anywhere we need to build windfarms, so dont put words in my mouth.

Yes I do believe that we are poluting and thus killing our planet via Globablisation! If you want to me to expand then I will. I did not take my references from greenpeace.

And Britain currently makes up 20% of it's energy production through nuclear power - by 2020 that will have dropped to 0% - a defecit that will mainly be made up through coal and gas fired power stations. This is pure lunacy and wholly against the stated aims of greenpeace, yet they will have just as large a part of the blame if global warming really does get out of control and we don't utilise nuclear power to stop it.
Your figures maybe right, but your statements are not. The UK is comitted to Kaoto. Thus it will reduce its carbon emmisions opposite of increasing them.

It's thise blind bloody-minded dogmatic crap from greenpeace about how nuclear power is 'evil' which really pisses me off the most - I can only show comtempt for any organisation that gets the facts so blatantly wrong and are so blind to scientific reasoning.
The more you rant then less liberal you are begining to look. Do you even know what "Dogma" means? And you my friend are painting a picture which is so extreem and non-sensical its untrue.
Being anti-globalisation is inherenly anti-free trade and pro-protectionism. Forcing the closure of nuclear plants, banning their construction and solely building reneable power plants (at great expense to the taxpayer. I'm serious in saying that if Britain were to fuel it's energy demands solely through wind power our economy would collapse completely due to the massive cost and inevitable power cuts on calm days) is anti-capitalist as it means the state has absolute control over the industry, completely eschewing the market. Ditto for agriculture as Greenpeace believe in practically banning imports due to the pollition caused during their transport. Greenpeace believe in coercing people to follow their line, at the very least their policies are inherently socialist and utterly authoritarian, at worst they're quasi-terrorists who stop at nothing to acheive their aims.
Being Anti-globalisation is NOT anti-free trade, this is pure right wing "propogander" And certianly is NOT a liberal stance. Globalisation relises on "Market Forces" and mainly on the ecconomics of "large." Market Forces are not "Free" it is a system that traps the consumer and companies in to follow the pattern of buying of the cheapest, and being eaten by the largest. You will end up with as you can see today Bigger than Bigger Corporations that control the market they are in. This is NOT free or fair, as it just enforces the poverty line, keeping the rich rich and the poor poor. So dont give me your free crap.

GreenPeace are a VOICE against these massive capitalist machines that cant stop poluting. And goverments that look at the bottom line and not at the harm it is causing.

Greenpeace believe in coercing people to follow their line, at the very least their policies are inherently socialist and utterly authoritarian, at worst they're quasi-terrorists who stop at nothing to acheive their aims
LoL thats funny at the best....
 
Last edited:
  • #28
379
0
Anttech is right. Free trade does nothing to raise a country out of poverty, all it does it provide cheap labor to large companies for rich countries to get cheaper goods.

You want to raise poor countries out of poverty? Stop the World Bank from loan-sharking them. Then they might be able to actually develop an economy that benefits the country rather than one that benefits the west.
 
Last edited:

Related Threads on Greenpeace vs. Japanese Whalers WHO WILL WIN?

  • Poll
  • Last Post
7
Replies
168
Views
15K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
618
  • Last Post
5
Replies
119
Views
9K
Top