Posted by PigParty

There's the fog of war, and then there's carelessness. I'm not saying that we're being careless. Just pointing out the difference.

Also, we're not actually at war. Not sure why, though.

One issue with civilian casualties is that we're not fighting the civilians' country. They're not affiliated in any way with the enemy we're fighting. That's why there's a strong need not to kill them with our airstrikes and other attacks against ISIS. It's like bombing Brazilians in order to retaliate against Japan after Pearl Harbor. America needs to be careful and not just dismiss everything as okay or for the "greater good".

This is different. The enemy isn't a nation that we can easily identify.

The people we're fighting blend in with those around them. Their whole gimmick is to use innocent civilians as cover.

The way we currently are fighting ISIS is the exact way they want us to fight. By killing those innocent civilians along with couple of actual terrorists we're buying into the whole "turn people into terrorists" deal.

But again, nobody wants to get their hands dirty even if they're not even the ones doing the fighting.  

Posted by 5hift

This is different. The enemy isn't a nation that we can easily identify.

The people we're fighting blend in with those around them. Their whole gimmick is to use innocent civilians as cover.

The way we currently are fighting ISIS is the exact way they want us to fight. By killing those innocent civilians along with couple of actual terrorists we're buying into the whole "turn people into terrorists" deal.

But again, nobody wants to get their hands dirty even if they're not even the ones doing the fighting.

I agree 100% which is why I think we need to be especially careful about civilian casualties. It's too easy to cause them, and it only helps the enemy. Civilian casualties are going to happen, but we can limit it a lot, and we should make an extra effort to do so.  

Posted by Sardon

very true although Trump is a conman and in this case I agree with them.

I do not support the Trump administration I hope these 4 years aren't too damaging.

My main concern is the climate research which he isn't funding
Climate change is a real issue and anyone who is scientifically literate should be able to understand the fact that if we don't do anything the human race as we know it will cease to exist.

Around the end of our lifetimes the polar ice caps will melt completely which will cause sea levels to rise at a point where many cities will be underwater
(including my own)

Also he's full of sh1t on practically everything,He even tried to convince people it wasn't raining during his ignauguration speech while most people had umbrellas in the footage.

It makes sense that you think that Trump probably doesn't fund the prevention of global warming, but you need to consider the global role contributing to global warming. Trump knows that US needs more jobs and therefore, he's letting global warming happen and making more jobs by making more industries. Besides even if Trump converted to solar energy, what about all the other countries? Will they do the same?..... Your last statement imo makes no sense at all so if you could elaborate, please do so.  

Posted by DoubleliftGraal

It makes sense that you think that Trump probably doesn't fund the prevention of global warming, but you need to consider the global role contributing to global warming. Trump knows that US needs more jobs and therefore, he's letting global warming happen and making more jobs by making more industries. Besides even if Trump converted to solar energy, what about all the other countries? Will they do the same?..... Your last statement imo makes no sense at all so if you could elaborate, please do so.

What are you talking about?? We finally signed the Paris Agreement last year which means that a ton of countries have actually come together and actually agreed to stop temperatures rising and to reduce emissions; if I remember correctly around 170 countries signed. As a world we are making huge steps to fight climate change, America on the other hand wants to move in the opposite direction and have decided that increasing coal output and withdrawing from the Paris Agreement are somehow good ideas. Every other first-world country is making steps to fight climate change, it's you who are not.

Posted by DoubleliftGraal

he's letting global warming happen and making more jobs

So he's letting something happen that will effect the entire world negatively for generations to happen in order to create short-term jobs which won't last. Sounds like like a really great deal.  

Posted by DoubleliftGraal

It makes sense that you think that Trump probably doesn't fund the prevention of global warming, but you need to consider the global role contributing to global warming. Trump knows that US needs more jobs and therefore, he's letting global warming happen and making more jobs by making more industries. Besides even if Trump converted to solar energy, what about all the other countries? Will they do the same?..... Your last statement imo makes no sense at all so if you could elaborate, please do so.

I don't think it's really a valid argument to say that other countries are still contributing a lot to global warming so it's okay if we do too. It would be impossible to get others involved in reducing carbon emissions/pollution if everyone thought that way. But China is the biggest country for carbon emissions, and Russia and India aren't too far off either. I'm not confident that they will be as encouraged to hop on board the global warming train either.

Also, coal is not an industry that Trump can bring back. There's a reason coal has been on a major decline in the U.S., and it's not because of Obama-era regulations. Economics is the main cause for the coal job decline. Advancement in technology made it cheaper and more efficient to extract/produce energy in other ways. The idea that Trump can bring coal jobs back by eliminating regulations is false.

I do think that Republicans are way too stubborn with not adapting and wanting to fund research for cheaper, cleaner ways of producing energy, but the Democrats are in way too big of a hurry to immediately convert everything to solar/wind when it's not efficient and cheap enough yet.  

Posted by DoubleliftGraal

It makes sense that you think that Trump probably doesn't fund the prevention of global warming, but you need to consider the global role contributing to global warming. Trump knows that US needs more jobs and therefore, he's letting global warming happen and making more jobs by making more industries. Besides even if Trump converted to solar energy, what about all the other countries? Will they do the same?..... Your last statement imo makes no sense at all so if you could elaborate, please do so.

Like many people have stated many 1st world countries have taken steps to fight this threat.
Short term jobs are nice but melted ice caps are not!
Many coastal cities in the U.S will be underwater.
Speaking of water he now allows corporations to throw waste inside rivers and lakes.

Saving the world >Creating temporary jobs  

The average person only cares about the "here and now". If the future won't affect them, then why should they care? They'll be dead anyway. If there's a choice between something that'll make the world last longer in the long run, and something that will make the now better, make their own life better, they'd mostly likely choose what benefits them personally the most. Humans are inherently selfish.

Spoiler

Most people who say they care about Global Warming are only trying to make themselves look good because wanting to prevent it is the ethical thing to do. Only those who are dedicating their lives to preventing it any further are the ones who, in their mind, truly care.

 

Posted by Force

Most people who say they care about Global Warming are only trying to make themselves look good because wanting to prevent it is the ethical thing to do. Only those who are dedicating their lives to preventing it any further are the ones who, in their mind, truly care.

Not true at all. Yes, some people pick a side in order to make themselves feel better and hold the moral high ground in their mind, but there's plenty of people who care about global warming but aren't joining interest groups and lobbying for more regulations. That's like saying you couldn't care less about a sick family member because you're not directly helping them. Just doesn't make sense.

Posted by Sardon

Like many people have stated many 1st world countries have taken steps to fight this threat.
Short term jobs are nice but melted ice caps are not!

I don't even get what jobs they claim he's creating. I don't see any evidence of new job creation as a result of deregulating companies and how they affect the environment. All it seems to do in my mind is let the businesses get wealthier. Just another false promise that's helping the rich.  

Posted by Force

Most people who say they care about Global Warming are only trying to make themselves look good because wanting to prevent it is the ethical thing to do. Only those who are dedicating their lives to preventing it any further are the ones who, in their mind, truly care.

It might surprise you but some people genuinely care about future generations and the billions of people that will live on this Earth after we are all long gone. Why should they suffer for problems we created? This isn't something like the economy, it's likely that the change in climate that happens will be irreversible - if we **** this up, the billions of people born after us will have to suffer the pain of our actions.  

Posted by DoubleliftGraal

It makes sense that you think that Trump probably doesn't fund the prevention of global warming, but you need to consider the global role contributing to global warming. Trump knows that US needs more jobs and therefore, he's letting global warming happen and making more jobs by making more industries. Besides even if Trump converted to solar energy, what about all the other countries? Will they do the same?..... Your last statement imo makes no sense at all so if you could elaborate, please do so.

Trump doesn't even believe in global warming. Besides, it doesn't matter. 4 years of fund migration isn't that bad, especially when half the cause of global warming is natural (and it's about to get a hell of a lot worse when the magnetic field reverses). Tackling global warming is, by definition, a global effort, so it isn't like the US is in some kind of ecosystem bubble that isn't affected by external actions.

Posted by Force

The average person only cares about the "here and now". If the future won't affect them, then why should they care? They'll be dead anyway. If there's a choice between something that'll make the world last longer in the long run, and something that will make the now better, make their own life better, they'd mostly likely choose what benefits them personally the most. Humans are inherently selfish.

Spoiler

Most people who say they care about Global Warming are only trying to make themselves look good because wanting to prevent it is the ethical thing to do. Only those who are dedicating their lives to preventing it any further are the ones who, in their mind, truly care.

If you hadn't noticed, people actually have ambitions. Do you like movies? If you said yes, that's false because you didn't make the movies so that means you don't care about them.  

Posted by PigParty

Not true at all. Yes, some people pick a side in order to make themselves feel better and hold the moral high ground in their mind, but there's plenty of people who care about global warming but aren't joining interest groups and lobbying for more regulations.

Not true at all? Au contraire. You just said yourself that people pick a side to hold the moral high ground. You said some, and I said most, both being conjecture. There are people who care obviously, but what I'm saying is that they don't truly care, like someone who's dedicating their life to the cause. Thus, America "moving in the opposite direction" as Vendetta put it.

Posted by PigParty

That's like saying you couldn't care less about a sick family member because you're not directly helping them. Just doesn't make sense.

A family member is someone whom you personally form a bond with, whom has possibly cared for you, and whom you grow to love. Completely different than the planet. You can love the planet, but it's much easier for someone to feel love for another person. If the planet died, the average person would fear for the lives of their loved ones and themselves, not for the planet itself. It's not like saying "you couldn't care less about a sick family member because you're not directly helping them" at all. Of course people care about the planet, but like I said, it mostly isn't because of the planet itself. Which leads to what you quoted of mine. If it doesn't affect their lives, people tend not to take it too seriously. Global Warming isn't a sick family member whose death will affect their own life. Our lives will be over by the time Global Warming effects are life changing. Try not to use phrases like "not true at all" and "just doesn't make sense" when debating psychological opinions. You don't know how everyone thinks, and neither do I. I only gave my opinion on the subject based on what I've seen in people.

Posted by TWIZ

If you hadn't noticed, people actually have ambitions. Do you like movies? If you said yes, that's false because you didn't make the movies so that means you don't care about them.

That example doesn't really fit too well. Having ambitions in life fits with what I said about people dedicating themselves to stop Global Warming. That's ambition. Arguing over the internet about whether the United States should be doing more to help stop Global Warming is not ambitious and isn't helping the cause. If you want to fix it, go out there and work at it. With something like this, you have to go out there and give it your all. This is our planet we're talking about. If not, then you don't really care all that much do you? Which is what I'm saying, most people don't.  

Posted by Force

A family member is someone whom you personally form a bond with, whom has possibly cared for you, and whom you grow to love. Completely different than the planet. You can love the planet, but it's much easier for someone to feel love for another person. If the planet died, the average person would fear for the lives of their loved ones and themselves, not for the planet itself. It's not like saying "you couldn't care less about a sick family member because you're not directly helping them" at all. Of course people care about the planet, but like I said, it mostly isn't because of the planet itself. Which leads to what you quoted of mine. If it doesn't affect their lives, people tend not to take it too seriously. Global Warming isn't a sick family member whose death will affect their own life. Our lives will be over by the time Global Warming effects are life changing. Try not to use phrases like "not true at all" and "just doesn't make sense" when debating psychological opinions. You don't know how everyone thinks, and neither do I. I only gave my opinion on the subject based on what I've seen in people.

They don't love the planet. They love their kids, their friends, their family, their kids' future, the plants, or the animals. People are passionate about global warming without being directly involved in solving it. Not everyone (pretty much no one) is able to dedicate their lives to everything they feel passionate about. I feel passionate about family, animals, cancer, smoking, alcohol consumption, and dozens and dozens of other things. Things I feel very passionate about. You can't simply dismiss it because I'm not dedicating my entire life to it.
Also, my opinion is that your statement wasn't true at all. You can, and did argue differently, however, I still hold that opinion.

Posted by Force

With something like this, you have to go out there and give it your all. This is our planet we're talking about. If not, then you don't really care all that much do you? Which is what I'm saying, most people don't.

How does that make sense, though? "With something like this" but what does that even mean? There's different levels of passion. Someone can be passionate about the environment but not dedicate their entire life to it because they have other passions. Plus many people know (or believe) that they cannot individually cause a change. That doesn't even mean the typical idea that no one can change the world, but people have responsibilities. It's foolish to say someone doesn't care about something just because they aren't giving it their all towards that cause when they have plenty of responsibilites themselves such as working and supporting a family, raising kids, taking care of elderly parents, working at a school to help teach the kids (which are the future). Everyone contributes in different ways. One person may donate money, another may volunteer, another may become a politician, and another may just voice their stance on social media/the internet in order to attempt to raise awareness and convert people to their beliefs.

Posted by Force

That example doesn't really fit too well. Having ambitions in life fits with what I said about people dedicating themselves to stop Global Warming. That's ambition.

That's assuming that global warming is a more important topic than movies. But that's a personal decision. The example @TWIZ gave was actually accurate. People have different ambitions. People love movies, but they don't make them. People love the environment, but they don't join the EPA. You can't keep acting like everyone is capable of dropping everything and joining some group to directly combat global warming. Everyone has a role. Not everyone is capable of directly getting involved in fighting global warming. Societal pressure does wonders much greater, without expecting every American citizen to join the same role in society, leaving every other role behind.  

Fun fact new study shows coal could be used for solar panels.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.wefor...w-use-for-coal

Your welcome hippies, even if cities start going under water will just adapt to our environment and start fresh like we've always done before.

The ice caps arnt even suppose to be there their there cause technically were in the final stages of a ice age.

Heres more surprising things that need coal
http://www.spike.com/articles/rmp9a8...d-uses-of-coal  

Posted by TomatoPanda

Fun fact new study shows coal could be used for solar panels.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.wefor...w-use-for-coal

Your welcome hippies, even if cities start going under water will just adapt to our environment and start fresh like we've always done before.

The ice caps arnt even suppose to be there their there cause technically were in the final stages of a ice age.

Heres more surprising things that need coal
http://www.spike.com/articles/rmp9a8...d-uses-of-coal

Lol.

Just lol.  

Posted by 5hift

Lol.

Just lol.

Great a liberal only believes in facts that support their believes.

Cant lol at me till you take that anime out of your sig.