Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Offensive ad gaining attention (Tsunami ad ref. 9/11)
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
Captiv8



Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8547
Location: Third Coast
 Reply with quote  

cakes wrote:
i can def see that, Captiv. however, if you're talking strictly death tolls, according to wikipedia roughly 140,000 people died in Hiroshima, 80,000 in Nagasaki, and roughly 5,933,900 Jews during WWII, and that doesn't include other populations killed as a part of the Holocaust (depending on your definition because other populations were targeted). Yes, all still significanly more than 9-11, but the tsunami as well. Yea, I'm including massacres in terrorism. Point is there's always something, unfortunately.

And speaking on natural disasters:
Ten deadliest natural disasters wrote:

1. 1931 China floods China July-November, 1931 1,000,0004,000,000
2. 1887 Yellow River flood China - September-October, 1887 900,0002,000,000
3. 1556 Shaanxi earthquake Shaanxi Province, China - January 23, 1556 830,000
4. 1970 Bhola cyclone Bangladesh - November 13, 1970 500,000
5. 1839 India Cyclone India - November 25, 1839 300,000
6. 526 Antioch earthquake Antioch, Byzantine Empire - May 20, 526 250,000
7. 1976 Tangshan earthquake Tangshan, Hebei, China - July 28, 1976 242,000
8. 1920 Haiyuan earthquake Haiyuan, Ningxia-Gansu, China - December 26, 1920 240,000
9. 1975 Banqiao Dam flood Zhumadian, Henan Province, China - August 7, 1975 90,000230,000
10. 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake/tsunami Indian Ocean - December 26, 2004 229,866

sure the theory is that it's getting worse, but can we blame the hummers on these? sorry, i'm just really annoyed with this apparently. I still don't know too much because i never got a's in history class.

and i def see why people criticized aid and response, but it's tough to really sift through sometimes. and that's not something that's just related to international business. initial Katrina responses from the us government weren't praised either.


My point was that if the ad is supposed to create a feeling amongst non-US citizens that the US overreacted to 9/11, which in turn led the US to not respond to other, deadlier world disasters more effectively, they did it wrong. Then it took it in extremis to the issue of terrorism itself.

"Why such public outcry by the United States over 9/11, who has been terrorizing people since before its creation? Need proof? Boom Hiroshima, boom Nagasaki, etc. The US gets attacked once and launches a ridiculous war in the Middle East, effectively wasting billions and billions of dollars that could have been spent either within this country or at to help other ailing countries."

I don't know, something like that. But as the ad stands now it's tasteless and confusing.
Post Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:30 am
 View user's profile Send private message
cakes



Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2586
 Reply with quote  

oh yes, i def hear what you're saying. i'm just beating my original response that you can't compare them in that way, which is why the add doesn't make it's point (however unclear) in my opinion. too many things to compare and too many other things happening at the same time that we may or may not be aware of.

i'm being obnoxious, but i'm obsessed with what you can and can't compare, assume, or conclude from anything these days. whether it be numbers, events, or sociological patterns, there is a great deal that many of us don't or can't take into account because we either didn't do our homework or don't have the clearance. i have a love/hate relationship with confounding variables and am at that stage where i'm learning enough to know how much i don't know and realizing the holes with some of the idealistic theories i once thought were the only answer.
Post Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:38 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Captiv8



Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8547
Location: Third Coast
 Reply with quote  

It's all good. Oh, the many parallels and false comparisons of life!
Post Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:43 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Confidential



Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 2040
 Reply with quote  

cakes wrote:
Plum Puddin' wrote:
Nearly 50% of the worlds scientists are assigned to military projects.
where'd this number come from? out of what kinds of scientists? all scientists? how are we even defining "scientist"? what are you assuming about what it means?



Include the "hard sciences"; physics, chemistry, biology, etc., and, increasingly, the "soft sciences"; anthropology (see Human Terrain). Include public/private research funding from DOD and include the defense industry; raytheon, boeing, etc. and I think it is reasonable to say at least 50% of U.S. (I don't know about "the world's" but probably similar scientists are assigned to military projects. In the US during the cold war, the University system was pretty much designed to be the U.S. government's personal research facility, and up to this day, many programs that seem innocuous or unrelated to military are actually sponsored by the DOD. And its safe to assume that the military usually gets dibs on the latest technology. Now that the economy has been restructured a bit, the University is about equal parts military and business, so the capitalists' training of young capitalists and workers in the global economy is subsidized by the university. I'm on a tangent though.

The add didn't offend me personally, but knowing the national psyche of Americans, there is no way that this add could get its not-exactly-clear point accross.
Post Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:46 am
 View user's profile Send private message
neveragainlikesheep



Joined: 22 May 2008
Posts: 2536
Location: TKO from Tokyo
 Reply with quote  

9/11: NEVER FORGET OR BRING UP IN A WAY THAT MIGHT MAKE PEOPLE THINK A BIT PAST THEMSELVES, THEIR COUNTRY OR THEIR "PATRIOTISM" AND ON TO OTHER THINGS.
Post Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:28 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Captiv8



Joined: 25 Aug 2006
Posts: 8547
Location: Third Coast
 Reply with quote  

neveragainlikesheep wrote:
9/11: NEVER FORGET OR BRING UP IN A WAY THAT MIGHT MAKE PEOPLE THINK A BIT PAST THEMSELVES, THEIR COUNTRY OR THEIR "PATRIOTISM" AND ON TO OTHER THINGS.


But that's not the point of the ad. It's trying to make people feel bad for feeling bad about 9/11, as opposed to the huge tsunami. No one is saying we can't talk or think critically about 9/11.
Post Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:52 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Majawala



Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 1806
 Reply with quote  

i dont think we have the resources to goto war with the ocean.
Post Thu Sep 03, 2009 1:56 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
cakes



Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2586
 Reply with quote  

neveragainlikesheep wrote:
9/11: NEVER FORGET OR BRING UP IN A WAY THAT MIGHT MAKE PEOPLE THINK A BIT PAST THEMSELVES, THEIR COUNTRY OR THEIR "PATRIOTISM" AND ON TO OTHER THINGS.
haha. you totally just typed this in all caps. i know what you're saying, but complaining about it is so 2003. you don't seem to be reading anything but your own posts in this thread.

Majawala wrote:
i dont think we have the resources to goto war with the ocean.
word. no worries, sheep will find some. the blinders are off.
Post Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:08 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Mac Lethal
the one with the back hair


Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Posts: 1920
Location: kc
 Reply with quote  

Smacking my forehead.

Ok, look.

I was emotionally ruptured by the tsunami.
But I was more emotionally ruptured by Hurricane Katrina.
But I was even more emotionally ruptured by the tornado in Greensburg, KS, that destroyed an entire town of 1,500. (Most of you probably don't even know this happened.)

Mark in Minnesota was upset by the tornado in Greensburg, KS.
But he was even more upset by the bridge collapsing in Minnesota.

I was upset by 9/11.
But I was even more upset by my mother dying in 2004.

In fact, my mother dying, affected me more than any catastrophic leveling of a place via terrorism or natural disaster ever has.

I am sickened by the shallowness of people thinking a more voluminous death toll means more emotion should be shed by certain people.

People grieve over things they consider relative to their own lives/homes/well-being.
Post Thu Sep 03, 2009 2:28 pm
 View user's profile Send private message

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Fri Nov 21, 2014 6:38 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon