Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
And if the Greenpeace ship had not been there in the first place tryng to block the path of the Japanese ships?
The Greenpeace ships very obviously kept placing themselves in the path of the Japanese ships. A collision was bound to happen because of their recklessness.
Meanwhile, the page of Sea Shepherd brags about ramming and sinking Japanese ships. Sorry, I don't believe the greenpeace claims.
Where did you hear that? From what I've read, the Greenpeace volunteers were putting inflatable zodiaks between the whalers and the whales. Not their ship...
"Statements by both parties conflict as to when the collision occurred and who caused the collision, but the video of the incident on the Greenpeace site clearly shows the Nisshin Maru cuting across the path of the Arctic Sunrise in breach of the collision avoidance rules at sea."
Would you believe video evidence?
Yes, I've watched it. And from what I see the activists were acting recklessly.
Go to Sea Sheppard's website to see them bragging about ramming and sinking ships. Then tell me this was the Japanese's fault.
And you are relying on an interpretation of the video made by activists.
Well, the Japanese say one thing and the activists say something else. Either way it's not going to be solved here by us.
I'm curious, do you care if we hunt whales to extinction?
Yes. I oppose whale hunting.
But I also oppose the tactics used by the activists and would fully support the Japanese installing deck guns to defend themselves. The activists have no legal authority to be trying to disable ships and endanger lives.
How would you feel if I opposed something you did and was ramming your car, impeding your drive to work and risking your life?
Fair enough.
Originally posted by: Czar
Doesnt anyone find it odd that there is a huge powerful international body regarding whales but.... there is nothing in even close when it comes to species which are in far more danger than whales?
Originally posted by: Amused
How would you feel if I opposed something you did and was ramming your car, impeding your drive to work and risking your life?
Originally posted by: Scarpozzi
The Japanese are not environmentalists when it comes to the ocean. I've seen plenty of pictures of the way they slaughtered bottle nosed dolphins because they thought they were eating all of thier fish....when it was just because they overfished their coasts.
Originally posted by: TheGizmo
yea thats really fvcked up. they can go catch something that is not endangered
Originally posted by: LongCoolMother
That's an awesome bridge!
I like this bridge
here too
but i live by this one
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: LongCoolMother
That's an awesome bridge!
I like this bridge
here too
but i live by this one
Clicked on the wrong thread, I see.
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: MS Dawn
Originally posted by: Amused
How would you feel if I opposed something you did and was ramming your car, impeding your drive to work and risking your life?
There is an international moratorium on whaling. The research quotient is a loophole that needs to be closed. What they are doing is illegal.
If you were driving recklessly the police would ram your car to stop you if you did not stop, no?
Two wrongs don't make a right for sure and (Greenpeace) does seem a little radical - painting graffiti is rather childish.
Polluting the water with sounds to chase the whales is a very bad idea too! Look up SCRIPPS and see what the Navy has been doing with their underwater speaker system. The whales become disoriented and beach themselves.
The Japanese are very harsh to marine life in general. The dolphin runs at Iki island cannot be ignored yet they are. That is one of the most crucifying and horrible abuse of nature ever.
The loophole exists, making their actions LEGAL, not illegal. Close the loophole and THEN their actions will be illegal.
The activists are not recognized authorities. Comparing them to cops is absurd. I asked the question using myself, a private citizen for a reason.
The activists ARE breaking the law and are nothing more than pirates and terrorists. The Japanese fleet would be perfectly within their rights in defending themselves with deadly force. The activist ships aren't even properly registered.
If you disagree with what the Japanese are doing, use your energies to close the loophole, and using recognized authorities to enforce it.
While I oppose whailing, I oppose the actions of the activists even more. Sorry this offends you but if you were to view this objectively and stop reacting emotionally, you'd agree with me. You cannot have private citizens running around putting lives and property in danger simply because they oppose what someone is doing.
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: tagej
What's needed is a way to create a noise or signal that will cause the whales to temporarily leave the area. That way a GP boat could simply follow the whalers around creating that noise every now and again, and the whalers would not be able to kill anything. Short of that, sinking every whaling ship is perfectly acceptable to me.
So it's OK to take human life to protect an animal?
well endangered species vs overpopulated species...![]()
I see. So you would be willing to die to save an "endangered" species?
Amused, I don't think any humans should die to save the whales, but quit it with this 'tard logic.
For starters, sinking whaling ships doesn't necessarily mean killing whalers.
And secondly, it's completely illogical to say that if a person would be willing to take the life of a person who is actively trying to kill whales, then they must be willing to give their own life to save the whales. You can't just lump all humans together and say that if you're willing to kill one you must be willing to kill all of them.
No "tard logic" here. If it's not worth dying for, it's not worth killing for.
A measure that unfortunately is not taught to kids these days.
And I don't know about you, but if someone is ramming a ship I am on (especially in cold antarctic waters), I'm going to fear for my life.
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Yes. I oppose whale hunting.
But I also oppose the tactics used by the activists and would fully support the Japanese installing deck guns to defend themselves. The activists have no legal authority to be trying to disable ships and endanger lives.
How would you feel if I opposed something you did and was ramming your car, impeding your drive to work and risking your life?
Fair enough.
Originally posted by: Bacstar
Somewhere or in some movie someone said, let the human race screw themselves into extinction. the earth will recover and a new species will become dominant. All this environmental save the planet movement is a bunch of BS and a waste of time.... the sooner we die off the better![]()
Originally posted by: Qianglong
japan needed a few more nuke in 1945
Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Yes. I oppose whale hunting.
But I also oppose the tactics used by the activists and would fully support the Japanese installing deck guns to defend themselves. The activists have no legal authority to be trying to disable ships and endanger lives.
How would you feel if I opposed something you did and was ramming your car, impeding your drive to work and risking your life?
Fair enough.
I'm just throwing this out there:
What if a group of people did something that you strongly, strongly oppose, but no matter how hard you fight, "legal authorities" continue to do nothing, and will continue to do nothing. You continue to fight through official legal channels, but unfortunately not enough people give a damn about your cause.
What do you do?
Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Yes. I oppose whale hunting.
But I also oppose the tactics used by the activists and would fully support the Japanese installing deck guns to defend themselves. The activists have no legal authority to be trying to disable ships and endanger lives.
How would you feel if I opposed something you did and was ramming your car, impeding your drive to work and risking your life?
Fair enough.
I'm just throwing this out there:
What if a group of people did something that you strongly, strongly oppose, but no matter how hard you fight, "legal authorities" continue to do nothing, and will continue to do nothing. You continue to fight through official legal channels, but unfortunately not enough people give a damn about your cause.
You're in a tight spot:
1. You have a pretty large following, so this issue is NOT a small thing, nor is your following insignificant.
2. BUT your following is not large enough to have the clout to really affect change through legal means.
What do you do?
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Is this supposed to make me, as a reasonable adult, side with the whalers?Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Yes. I oppose whale hunting.
But I also oppose the tactics used by the activists and would fully support the Japanese installing deck guns to defend themselves. The activists have no legal authority to be trying to disable ships and endanger lives.
How would you feel if I opposed something you did and was ramming your car, impeding your drive to work and risking your life?
Fair enough.
I'm just throwing this out there:
What if a group of people did something that you strongly, strongly oppose, but no matter how hard you fight, "legal authorities" continue to do nothing, and will continue to do nothing. You continue to fight through official legal channels, but unfortunately not enough people give a damn about your cause.
You're in a tight spot:
1. You have a pretty large following, so this issue is NOT a small thing, nor is your following insignificant.
2. BUT your following is not large enough to have the clout to really affect change through legal means.
What do you do?
Originally posted by: iamaelephant
Originally posted by: Qianglong
japan needed a few more nuke in 1945
F*** you. Ban this idiot.
Originally posted by: SonnyDaze
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
i hate greenpeace
bunch of gimps
:thumbsup: They're all for saving animals but the acts they commit are like terrorism. They have no regard for human life in order to save a few whales. :disgust:
