Bob Geldof Tells Arabs: Stop Breeding Or Nature Will Intervene

[John F Kennedy III]

Bob Geldof Tells Arabs: Stop Breeding Or Nature Will Intervene

Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars.com
March 17, 2012

At the second Gulf Intelligence Food Security Forum held on March 16 in the United Arab Emirates, self-proclaimed global citizen “sir” Bob Geldof told his audience in so many words they should stop having children or nature would do it for them.

“They either find a cultural way to make this acceptable or they’re going to have an anthropogenic critical event”, Geldof told a reporter after the event.

“I think the tipping point has been reached”, Geldof went on to say. “There can’t be more people on earth than we can feed.”



Rehashing the old Malthusian mantra that the earth compensates for what he considers to be excess humans, Geldof argues here for strict measures to halt population growth or else…

In response, the Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research of the Emirates, Sheikh Nahyan bin Mubarak fired back by saying:

“It’s not entirely clear to me that the way to succeed is to stop having children. They are the future.”


original article here:
http://www.infowars.com/bob-geldof-tells-arabs-stop-breeding-or-nature-will-intervene/

 

[oyarde]

This is a pretty strange way to promote a message , at the same time , without some major agricultural improvements , I suppose there are many , many arid places in the world that do not have the ability to feed themselves.

 

[Iceclops]

It just seems like common sense to me if you are educated about the world, environmental relationships, and cause and effect. Having two children is enough. I'd say the majority of people in the world are short-sighted though and on top of that contraception isn't available to them or it is social heresy based on their religious views.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

This is a pretty strange way to promote a message , at the same time , without some major agricultural improvements , I suppose there are many , many arid places in the world that do not have the ability to feed themselves.

I don't suppose it would take much for a large number to starve due to some type of natural event, but I doubt them breeding is going to have any effect on whether or not said natural event happens.

 

[ZenBowman]

Egypt has already populated themselves well beyond the food they can produce. Having a crapload of people in an arid desert is not a smart idea, Malthusian or not. It makes you dependent on outsiders for your food, which means you are essentially a slave.

I view libertarianism as a way to enforce good reproductive discipline - if you cannot afford children, don't have them. This effectively reduces birth rates without government control.

 

[Cowlesy]

Well unless they build cyborgs, the only way to build an army is to have lots of kids. Seems like in Survival 101, the Arabs are on the right track.

 

[oyarde]

Egypt has already populated themselves well beyond the food they can produce. Having a crapload of people in an arid desert is not a smart idea, Malthusian or not. It makes you dependent on outsiders for your food, which means you are essentially a slave.

I view libertarianism as a way to enforce good reproductive discipline - if you cannot afford children, don't have them. This effectively reduces birth rates without government control.

Egypt is a welfare state that depends on others to feed them , these same others share no common views with the Egyptians . So , yes , you gave a good example.

 

[oyarde]

Well unless they build cyborgs, the only way to build an army is to have lots of kids. Seems like in Survival 101, the Arabs are on the right track.

Well , I guess that could be plan B , build an Army and take the needed resources from others ? ....

 

[Cowlesy]

Well , I guess that could be plan B , build an Army and take the needed resources from others ? ....

Meh, if history is any judge. It seems that people tend to fight over resources.

 

[oyarde]

Meh, if history is any judge. It seems that people tend to fight over resources.

I guess it would be foolish to look for that to change ?

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

[TABLE="class: wikitable"]
[TR]
[TD]Well, tonight, thank God it's them, instead of you'[/TD]
[TD]Bono[/TD]
[TD]Jason Donovan/Kylie/Matt Goss[/TD]
[TD]Bono[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]'And there won't be snow in Africa, this Christmas time'[/TD]
[TD]Boy George/Paul Weller/Sting[/TD]
[TD]Marti Pellow[/TD]
[TD]Will Young & Jamelia[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]'The greatest gift they'll get this year is life'[/TD]
[TD]Bono/George Michael/Boy George[/TD]
[TD]Sonia[/TD]
[TD]Will Young & Jamelia[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]'Ooooooooohhhhh'[/TD]
[TD]Boy George[/TD]
[TD]Lisa Stansfield[/TD]
[TD]Will Young & Jamelia Or Ms Dynamite & Beverley Knight[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]'Where nothing ever grows'[/TD]
[TD]Paul Young[/TD]
[TD]Lisa Stansfield[/TD]
[TD]Ms Dynamite & Beverley Knight[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]'No rain nor rivers flow'[/TD]
[TD]Paul Weller[/TD]
[TD]Lisa Stansfield[/TD]
[TD]Ms Dynamite & Beverley Knight[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]'Do they know it's Christmas time at all?'[/TD]
[TD]All[/TD]
[TD]Sonia/Lisa Stansfield[/TD]
[TD]All[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]'Here's to you'[/TD]
[TD]Marilyn/Glenn Gregory/Rick Parfitt/Francis Rossi[/TD]
[TD]Kylie[/TD]
[TD]Tom Chaplin[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]'Raise a glass for everyone'[/TD]
[TD]Paul Young[/TD]
[TD]Kylie[/TD]
[TD]Justin Hawkins[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]'Spare a thought this yuletide for the deprived'
'If the table was turned would you survive?'[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Band Aid was a charity supergroup featuring leading British and Irish musicians and recording artists. It was founded in 1984 by Bob Geldof

http://luvtop.com/watch.php?ID=BWUYYSijfvo

 

[Victor Grey]

Was thinking on this a little; Arab countries generally don't have free markets, and they all of live under totalitarian states.

Many of those states, have oil as their main export.

Their people are kept suppressed generally, and if they want to better themselves, usually need to have the government's blessing. Be that by bribery or whatever means, the governments hinder them.

Those leadership in the government, kings and such often, their regimes get a huge share of the profits from the national oil industries. Perhaps with very small upperclass for management that gets something but mostly a one sided society.
The tyrants are allowed to spend that money as they please.

I would put forth the hypothesis, though I'm not sure, they whatever those in the tyrant rich-class or royal families spend, is quite often spent on imported goods.
There's only so much food and such that they need, so overall, the other people in their society don't even get that wealth generated by the oil industries, flowed down toward them secondarily. Instead, it goes in general over to industrialized countries. Their militaries are armed and fund the same, through goods manufactured overseas.

So while families of royal princes and leadership benefit in opulence, the citizens of those countries end up on the short end of things both ways.

The nations have little incentive to industrialize. The upper classes can purchase all they need overseas,
The rest of their population is suppressed by government from improving their lot where they will never succeed, and industrialization cannot spring up internally. Without of course the regime's blessings, usually because they are to it's benefit.

Because of this I would wonder if Arab countries will stay in a "malthusian trap" of poverty even if they did lower birth rates.