Humans Disaster VS Natural Disaster

[muskan]

1.5 million peoples died in tsunami disaster and the numbers are still on rise. the whole world is shocked and are grieving with the families suffered with this tragedy. So in some sense natural tragedy bring humans togather and give them a chance to help each other without any cast and religion they belongs too

Compare this to the one in which more than 1 million poeple killed by American disaster ( Human Disaster) and v r lookin for cast, religion and ethnic backgrounds to help the grieving familes

ever v think of helping the greiving families in iraq and afghanistan and stop americans for doin barbarians acts in these countries. Ever v think of the muslims v r accountable for in the day of judgment

So i think this natural disaster is an ultimatum for us to kick in and perform our jobs v r hired for
these r just my thoughts, what u guys think of these two kind of disasters and what should we to do now .

[Leader]

Compare this to the one in which more than 1 million poeple killed by American disaster

If you people repeat that lie enough, do you think people will stop calling you on it?

[muskan]

If you people repeat that lie enough, do you think people will stop calling you on it?

What the lie on it?

[Leader]

What the lie on it?

It's BS. Show me a million bodies or proof that they exist. The death toll is 5 to 10 thousand not a million.

[Ray]

I find the comparision a trifle misplaced.

Tsunami was a natural disaster where the men were caught unawares. There was no choice for the victims.

In a war, it is a choice. All have a choice to call the bid for the stakes.

While I do feel sorry about the numbers dying on either side, but I reckon in a war death is but natural.

Indeed the US should not have attacked. But then that would be abdicating her national interests. That would be disloyal to their population who voted the govt in to protect their interests.

Now Iran is on the sights of the US.

It is in Iran's national interst to build nukes, while it is in the US's national interest to ensure that Iran does not have nukes.

Thus there is a conflict of interest.

Now, if the US attacks, then would it be the US's fault?

Or if Iran continues to build the nukes, is it wrong?

The result is a clash of interest.

Then comes a war.

And in the bargain, people on both sides will die.

Therefore, logically, the US would not be at fault.

Ideally, since the US calls the shot and is more powerful, it would be better that Iran does not build nukes and so none will die! Same thing Saddam and the Talibans should have done. There would be no human disaster.

But if one wants to fight and then loses with many deaths thrown in, then there is no reason to weep and complain.

One should happily accept martyrdom and the Will of Allah, rather than grudingly accept the same and die kicking and yelling.

I would ratehr die with a smile so that I do not allow the adversary any satisfaction that my death may have been to him.

[Confed999]

1.5 million peoples died in tsunami disaster and the numbers are still on rise

233,000, and rising, to the best of my knowledge.

[ChrisF202]

233,000, and rising, to the best of my knowledge.

Confed is right on the number of Tsumani deaths, i belive the total number of Iraqi deaths is about 80,000 total, not a million. However, some people claim Saddam killed a million Iraqis in his rule and the number is without a doubt very close to a million.

[Confed999]

is about 80,000 total,

And the vast majority of those were fighting to keep Saddam in place, or worse.

[muskan]

Ray its for you..


A Man-Made Tsunami

Terry Jones


I am bewildered by the world reaction to the tsunami tragedy. Why are newspapers, television and politicians making such a fuss? Why has the British public forked out more than £100m to help the survivors, and why is Tony Blair now promising "hundreds of millions of pounds"? Why has Australia pledged £435m and Germany £360m? And why has Mr Bush pledged £187m?

Of course it's wonderful to see the human race rallying to the aid of disaster victims, but it's the inconsistency that has me foxed. Nobody is making this sort of fuss about all the people killed in Iraq, and yet it's a human catastrophe of comparable dimensions.

According to the only scientific estimate attempted, Iraqi deaths since the war began number more than 100,000. The tsunami death toll is in the region of 150,000. Yet in the case of Iraq, the media seems reluctant to impress on the public the scale of the carnage.

I haven't seen many TV reporters standing in the ruins of Falluja, breathlessly describing how, in 30 years of reporting, they've never seen a human tragedy on this scale. The Pope hasn't appealed for everyone to remember the Iraqi dead in their prayers, and MTV hasn't gone silent in their memory.

Nor are Blair and Bush falling over each other to show they recognise the scale of the disaster in Iraq. On the contrary, they have been doing their best to conceal the numbers killed.

When the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health estimated the figure of 100,000 killed in Iraq and published their findings in one of the world's leading scientific journals, the Lancet, Downing Street questioned their methodology, saying "the researchers used an extrapolation technique, which they considered inappropriate, rather than a detailed body count". Of course "a detailed body count" is the one thing the US military will not allow anyone to do.

What is so odd is the way in which so much of the media has fallen into line, downplaying the only authoritative estimate of casualties in Iraq with the same unanimity with which they have impressed upon us the death toll of the tsunami.

One of the authors of the forenamed report, Dr Gilbert Burnham, said: "Our data have been back and forth between many reviewers at the Lancet and here in the school, so we have the scientific strength to say what we have said with great certainty."

So, are deaths caused by bombs and gunfire less worthy of our pity than deaths caused by a giant wave? Or are Iraqi lives less worth counting than Indonesian, Thai, Indian and Swedish?

Why aren't our TV companies and newspapers running fundraisers to help Iraqis whose lives have been wrecked by the invasion? Why aren't they screaming with outrage at the man-made tsunami that we have created in the Middle East? It truly is baffling.

Terry Jones is a film director, actor and Python. His book Terry Jones's War on the War on Terror is published this month by the Nation

Published by The Guardian

[muskan]

number of Tsumani and Iraqi death is conflict.we shouldn't worried for figure. we should have same feelings For Iraqi, Afghani as we have Feelings for tsunami's People beacuse in both cases Humens lost their lifes.

[ZFBoxcar]

"number of Tsumani and Iraqi death is conflict.we shouldn't worried for figure. we should have same feelings For Iraqi, Afghani as we have Feelings for tsunami's People beacuse in both cases Humens lost their lifes."

Considering that you are the one who brought up the numbers, and grossly exagerated them (for both the tsunami and the war), that doesn't quite sound genuine.

[Ray]

Muskan,

Do be kind to tell him about waht I said.

or give me his e mail, and I will give him my opinion. After all he is entitled to his and me to mine. Neither is the gospel truth..

A journalist's job is to create some 'interest' article so that it sells.

Prince Harry for a lark wore a Nazi uniform and there was hell to pay. Now, if I wore one (not that I would), who the hell would care! No spice, No twist.

Princess Diana died in a car accident and there were so many stories for months. Then came the conspiracy theory and it is still on!

One Pakistani woman has a ball with an English football coach and there is a spicy story. Pakistan women turn out to be horny and leches. Then when Pakistan's reputation is in the mud, it turns out she was a Bangladeshi!

So, the media will tell the way it sells. Controversy, sex, damning leaders and so on.

Factual news is still OK, but opinions are BS. It is the writers opinion and it need not be correct.

[Commando]

With the Iran issue their wouldn't be an issue if their was no nuclear club.

Its nukes for all or none at all.

[ZFBoxcar]

Its nukes for all or none at all.

No. It isn't.

[Gio]

Commando,
What are you talking about?? It doesn't work that way.