Is it time to stop having many children?

July 25, 2008 at 6:51 pm (Uncategorized)

An editorial in the British Medical Journal by argues that if you live in the developed world you should stick to two children for the sake of the environment.

Here is the story of a father from the United Arab Emirates who already has 78 children and is aiming to have 100 (yes one hundred children)!

Daad Mohammed Murad Abdul Rahman, 60, has already had 15 brides although he has to divorce them as he goes along to remain within the legal limit of four wives at a time.

He will to have at least three more marriages to hit the century.

World population can’t multiply indefinitely. There should be a limit to its growth so that it can fit the limited resources of the earth. Even the current population can use up the available resources in a short time, causing huge environmental disasters, if the current consumption is tripled or quadrupled.

It is not enough to have a stable population, but also the mechanism to make each individual aware of his or her responsibility to the planet. This can be achieved if we stick to our basic needs without greed.

In Africa, there are many (poor) families with many children. These are not the cause of environmental problems. It is the rich in the developed countries that cause them these problems – for example- through illegal and excessive logging.

The current population can save the planet by being more environmentally aware and by using product that are environment friendly.

Should we insinuate from John Guillebaud’s editorial that the extra kids of today are the monsters of the future as they will ravish the environment?

There is an old maxim which says,” Our grandparents left us a safe environment, what environment shall we leave our children?”

With the ageing and falling population in many countries, children are still needed. There are countries like France that provide material incentives incentive to parents to have more children.

What is needed is to create an environmental and population balance for plants, species and people can live in harmony.

Considering kids as the future trouble is like seeing them as time bomb that should be stifled in the womb.

Leave a Comment

Can Barack Obama be above criticism?

July 25, 2008 at 12:46 am (Uncategorized)

Barack Obama in a primary campaign

Obama’s full name is Barack Hussein Obama. This is enough for his opponents to “accuse” him of being a Muslim.

There was an incident in which an advertisement on CNN for a feature about the whereabouts of the al-Qaeda leader carried the caption “Where’s Obama?” over images of Bin Laden. This was due to a misspelling of “Osama”. The CNN apologized for the mistake.

 

 

 

 

There can be tangible criticism of Obama concerning his policies. But the exploitation of his race, colour and even his name is gratuitous. As a hopeful candidate, he should stand all criticism and be able to ward it off. What will make the presidential campaign thrilling is the aggressive strength of views that shouldn’t leave the voters undecided.

 

 

 

From his speeches and interviews, Barack Obama looks more leaning towards resolving international problems through negotiations rather than war. His appeasing tone towards Iran may have drawn criticism towards him. Some want him to sound more threatening than appeasing.

 

 

 

Concerning his attitudes in the Middle East, some see that he’s more inclined to be responsive to Israel’s concerns because of the strong Jewish lobby in Israel. Like his predecessors, he won’t force Israel to show concessions to the Palestinians, especially the construction of new colonies.

 

 

 

Obama still have to endeavour to convince the voters that he’s the right man for the presidential job, by being categorical on foreign and domestic issues. The slightest slip of tongue or the wrong gesture will be exploited by his opponents, as it was the case during the primary contexts. Obama needs to be more careful, instead of resorting to apologies and clarifications as it happened when two women wearing a Muslim headscarf were barred from sitting next to him.

Leave a Comment

Is nuclear energy a viable solution?

July 25, 2008 at 12:35 am (Uncategorized)

 

 

The world currently holds 1.24 trillion barrels of proven oil reserves and 6,263 trillion cubic feet of proven natural gas reserves. . As the current daily need of oil is 86 million barrel a day, this means the world has enough oil for the coming 40 years, without counting future oil reserves discoveries.

 


There are people who accept nuclear energy as an alternative in view of the soaring oil prices. But at the same time, they say, there can be a nuclear station, except in their area.

Although nuclear accidents are rare, their disaster can be far worse than that of an oil refinery bursting into flames.

 


It will be better to develop clean energies from water, the sun and the wind. Efforts should be made to invent machines needing less energy consumption. Nuclear energy should be the last resort and not the priority, if there are no other options.

 

Some may argue that nuclear weapons are safe as long as they have never been used. They’re kept under heavy guard. The same can apply to nuclear stations if rigorous security standards are maintained. However, the problem with nuclear stations is the nuclear waste that should be kept in safe places. Dumping underground with vast and growing nuclear waste- should all countries opt for nuclear energy- can itself become a time bomb, threatening the soil which is the source of life.

Nuclear energy should be the last option for developing countries because of the risks it entails in case of a natural disaster or under-funding for the maintenance of the nuclear centres. It can also be used as a weapon by the developed countries that provide its technology to developing countries. In case of economic sanctions, the first thing to do is to deprive the target country from nuclear fuel. Understandably, any developing country wanting to acquire nuclear plants should do so under international supervision. For any country, it can be easy to buy as much oil as it wants and establish oil refineries without being under suspicion.

Leave a Comment