Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

LunaHound wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Why would a country where immigration is being used to offset a near zero birth rate consider sterilisation? What is that?

And again (and again and again) the primary factor in sustainability is resource use. It isn't population. Why don't people get that? It's very, very simple, and very obvious.

Why do people want to believe in the need for authoritarian population control? Where does that come from?

You should probably do what I did and just wring your hands of this thread. Debating things like population and resource statistics with 14 year old wargamers and the insane, especially in reference to china, isn't particularly productive as you probably now can see.

So what valuable insight have you brought to this thread so far other then screaming ignorance at others while
your own info you used to scream with is wrong?
Yes this is like page 7 , what alternative methods have you suggested other than sitting across the other side of the globe
criticizing others for their method?

Nothing I said is factually incorrect, but even more importantly that sentence doesn't even make any fething sense. Thats why I quit.

Only one person has answered my question.

Manchu wrote:Only one person has answered my question.

Put the lotion on the effected area and rub gently in a clockwise motion until it is absorbed into the skin. Do this ever 3-4 hours.

Also, don't forget to shave off all the hair before you do it.

Kanluwen wrote:Also, don't forget to shave off all the hair before you do it.

Wise words for all activities relating to the OT board.

... if we could, you know, please maintain a nice and civil tone to each other that'd be groovy.

ta.

What I don't understand is why you guys always seem to assume a degree of benevolent intent from your governments. Google Operation Gladio and see if it fits in with your worldview. Or how about this:

Henry Kissinger's 1974 Plan for Food Control Genocide

This article appeared as part of a feature in the December 8, 1995 issue of Executive Intelligence Review, and was circuclated extensively by the Schiller Insitute Food for Peace Movement. It is reprinted here as part of the package: “Who Is Responsible for the World Food Shortage?”

Kissinger’s 1974 Plan for Food Control Genocide

by Joseph Brewda
Dec. 8, 1995

On Dec. 10, 1974, the U.S. National Security Council under Henry Kissinger completed a classified 200-page study, “National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” The study falsely claimed that population growth in the so-called Lesser Developed Countries (LDCs) was a grave threat to U.S. national security. Adopted as official policy in November 1975 by President Gerald Ford, NSSM 200 outlined a covert plan to reduce population growth in those countries through birth control, and also, implicitly, war and famine. Brent Scowcroft, who had by then replaced Kissinger as national security adviser (the same post Scowcroft was to hold in the Bush administration), was put in charge of implementing the plan. CIA Director George Bush was ordered to assist Scowcroft, as were the secretaries of state, treasury, defense, and agriculture.

The bogus arguments that Kissinger advanced were not original. One of his major sources was the Royal Commission on Population, which King George VI had created in 1944 “to consider what measures should be taken in the national interest to influence the future trend of population.” The commission found that Britain was gravely threatened by population growth in its colonies, since “a populous country has decided advantages over a sparsely-populated one for industrial production.” The combined effects of increasing population and industrialization in its colonies, it warned, “might be decisive in its effects on the prestige and influence of the West,” especially effecting “military strength and security.”

NSSM 200 similarly concluded that the United States was threatened by population growth in the former colonial sector. It paid special attention to 13 “key countries” in which the United States had a “special political and strategic interest”: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Turkey, Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Mexico, Brazil, and Colombia. It claimed that population growth in those states was especially worrisome, since it would quickly increase their relative political, economic, and military strength.

For example, Nigeria: “Already the most populous country on the continent, with an estimated 55 million people in 1970, Nigeria's population by the end of this century is projected to number 135 million. This suggests a growing political and strategic role for Nigeria, at least in Africa.” Or Brazil: “Brazil clearly dominated the continent demographically.” The study warned of a “growing power status for Brazil in Latin America and on the world scene over the next 25 years.”

Food as a weapon

There were several measures that Kissinger advocated to deal with this alleged threat, most prominently, birth control and related population-reduction programs. He also warned that “population growth rates are likely to increase appreciably before they begin to decline,” even if such measures were adopted.

A second measure was curtailing food supplies to targetted states, in part to force compliance with birth control policies: “There is also some established precedent for taking account of family planning performance in appraisal of assistance requirements by AID [U.S. Agency for International Development] and consultative groups. Since population growth is a major determinant of increases in food demand, allocation of scarce PL 480 resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control as well as food production. In these sensitive relations, however, it is important in style as well as substance to avoid the appearance of coercion.”

“Mandatory programs may be needed and we should be considering these possibilities now,” the document continued, adding, “Would food be considered an instrument of national power? ... Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can't/won't control their population growth?”

Kissinger also predicted a return of famines that could make exclusive reliance on birth control programs unnecessary. “Rapid population growth and lagging food production in developing countries, together with the sharp deterioration in the global food situation in 1972 and 1973, have raised serious concerns about the ability of the world to feed itself adequately over the next quarter of century and beyond,” he reported.

The cause of that coming food deficit was not natural, however, but was a result of western financial policy: “Capital investments for irrigation and infrastucture and the organization requirements for continuous improvements in agricultural yields may be beyond the financial and administrative capacity of many LDCs. For some of the areas under heaviest population pressure, there is little or no prospect for foreign exchange earnings to cover constantly increasingly imports of food.”

“It is questionable,” Kissinger gloated, “whether aid donor countries will be prepared to provide the sort of massive food aid called for by the import projections on a long-term continuing basis.” Consequently, “large-scale famine of a kind not experienced for several decades—a kind the world thought had been permanently banished,” was foreseeable—famine, which has indeed come to pass.

http://www.schillerinstitute.org/food_for_peace/kiss_nssm_jb_1995.html

@Orky-Kowboy

This article appeared as part of a feature in the December 8, 1995 issue of Executive Intelligence Review

That's your problem right there. Lyndon LaRouche and his fellow lunatics at EIR are not a source you should be taking seriously. They claim that The British Empire (it still exists, apparently...) was directly responsible for 9/11. They are paranoid conspiracy theorists.

Orky-Kowboy wrote:What I don't understand is why you guys always seem to assume a degree of benevolent intent from your governments. Google Operation Gladio and see if it fits in with your worldview.

I don't believe that anyone has said that they believe that. Saying that, it still doesn't change the specific policy that is being discussed. So another government has thought of some jacked up policy as well, does that mean we should absolve anyone of any policy? I don't really believe that we have forfeited the right to consider this situation merely because another exists. The quotes in that article also seem very cherry picked to me, many of them being more statistical with the author throwing in their bent on it. I have no doubt that plans for what to do in case population issues arise have been made, as contingency plans are made for most unlikely scenarios, but there would be others as well. One report does not make a conspiracy.

What I think is odd is why people see a criticism of a policy and take the position that the entirety of a country has been insulted. No one has said they hate China or Chinese people as a whole but some of the reactions seem to be taking this stance.