Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Eco-terrorism or Justified Vigilantism??

medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:33:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm normally against vigilante action, or taking the law into our own hands, but there are instances where laws are passed and countries sign on to treaties, then completely ignore them. That seems to be the case when it comes to the Japanese whaling fleet. They exploit a loophole that allows the killing of whales for scientific research, however the Japanese kill nearly a thousand whales every year, and the meat is sold in restaurants in Japan.

I've never supported groups like the Sea Shephard Conservation Society, shown in this documentary, but I was surprised to find myself rooting for them while watching it.

No country is giving Japan a challenge on this, so I find it difficult to even call what the conservationists of the SSCS are doing ecoterrorism. I think what they're doing is justified. What say you??
ObiWan
Posts: 732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:58:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I have a kid in my class who is actually a part of the organisation (he's a vegan, animal rights protestor) and even though you're not allowed to go out on the boats until you are 18 he still helps out here and there. As such, I've gotten to know a bit about Sea Shepherd and I think what they are doing is definitely justifiable. Japan needs to be stopped from carrying out what is a blatantly obvious deception and could cause the extinction of a species.

I've also heard that sales of whale meat over there are dropping due to public protest against the killing, but I don't know if it's true.
These are not the droids you're looking for.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 10:25:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I just don't understand why the other governments that signed on to the treaty banning whaling don't take action against Japan or close that loophole. I might be able to understand a few whales being taken as scientific research, but not a thousand every year.

I became interested in this when watching the Whale Wars series. I wish there was a way for me to keep my job in the off-season, if so I'd sign on one of the ships as a medic.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 11:22:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The treaty cannot be justified, therefore action to protect it cannot be justified.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:02:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 11:53:52 AM, medic0506 wrote:
What do you mean it can't be justified??

The proper response to my statement is to justify it, the meaning of my statement is clear and by asking that question you only provide evidence for my statement. The burden of proof is on the person who wants to eradicate a commercial practice (what the treaty organization does despite the advice of its own scientists).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:07:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
There are also farmers all over the world breeding and replacing those animals. That's a food source that won't be allowed to go extinct. The same can't be said for whales. In addition, they are at the top of the food chain, and threatening them with extinction, or severely reduced numbers, can have negative effects on that entire ecosystem.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:09:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 11:54:07 AM, darkkermit wrote:
why does it matter if they kill whales by the thousands? We kill cows and pigs by the millions.

It isn't a moral argument. We can always make more pigs.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:18:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 12:09:57 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/18/2012 11:54:07 AM, darkkermit wrote:
why does it matter if they kill whales by the thousands? We kill cows and pigs by the millions.

It isn't a moral argument. We can always make more pigs.

And? What good are the whales if you can't kill any at all?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:29:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 11:54:07 AM, darkkermit wrote:
why does it matter if they kill whales by the thousands? We kill cows and pigs by the millions.

Agreed with bossy that it isn't a moral argument, or at least not only a moral argument, given risks of extinction... and I would add that even if you were pointing out hypocrisy that wouldn't make killing whales by the thousands justified; it's possible that both practices aren't justified. Have you ever read Peter Singer on animal rights? Pretty compelling and thought provoking stuff, even for a non-utilitarian such as myself.

The 2nd video is a conversation between Singer and Dawkins, very interesting.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:54:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 12:02:30 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 10/18/2012 11:53:52 AM, medic0506 wrote:
What do you mean it can't be justified??

The proper response to my statement is to justify it, the meaning of my statement is clear and by asking that question you only provide evidence for my statement. The burden of proof is on the person who wants to eradicate a commercial practice (what the treaty organization does despite the advice of its own scientists).

I think reasonable conservation of finite resources, especially those that effect entire ecosystems, justifies itself and doesn't need further explanation. The fact that whales have been hunted to the brink of extinction, in the past, justifies the need for conservation methods. From what little I've read on the subject, only the minke whale exists in numbers that could sustain commercial fishing for any significant period of time. That alone is justification enough for me.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:56:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 12:00:18 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
Why is commercial whale hunting illegal anyways?

Because so many species of whales were hunted to near extinction.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 12:59:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 12:29:37 PM, jat93 wrote:
At 10/18/2012 11:54:07 AM, darkkermit wrote:
why does it matter if they kill whales by the thousands? We kill cows and pigs by the millions.

Agreed with bossy that it isn't a moral argument, or at least not only a moral argument, given risks of extinction... and I would add that even if you were pointing out hypocrisy that wouldn't make killing whales by the thousands justified; it's possible that both practices aren't justified. Have you ever read Peter Singer on animal rights? Pretty compelling and thought provoking stuff, even for a non-utilitarian such as myself.

The 2nd video is a conversation between Singer and Dawkins, very interesting.




I've heard the argument and i'm actually a vegetarian. But yes, I understand the ecological justification for it.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 1:00:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 12:18:59 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 10/18/2012 12:09:57 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/18/2012 11:54:07 AM, darkkermit wrote:
why does it matter if they kill whales by the thousands? We kill cows and pigs by the millions.

It isn't a moral argument. We can always make more pigs.

And? What good are the whales if you can't kill any at all?

No one is saying that another whale can never again be killed, but there comes a point where you have stop and allow the population to recover.
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 4:20:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Given what we know of whales, there's a good likelihood that they're sentient. We don't exactly need to eat them (of course, we don't need to eat meat period). So why kill a probable sentient being?
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 4:26:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 4:20:27 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
Given what we know of whales, there's a good likelihood that they're sentient. We don't exactly need to eat them (of course, we don't need to eat meat period). So why kill a probable sentient being?

You realize pigs could also be sentient right?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 4:27:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 12:33:32 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I'm normally against vigilante action, or taking the law into our own hands, but there are instances where laws are passed and countries sign on to treaties, then completely ignore them. That seems to be the case when it comes to the Japanese whaling fleet. They exploit a loophole that allows the killing of whales for scientific research, however the Japanese kill nearly a thousand whales every year, and the meat is sold in restaurants in Japan.

I've never supported groups like the Sea Shephard Conservation Society, shown in this documentary, but I was surprised to find myself rooting for them while watching it.

No country is giving Japan a challenge on this, so I find it difficult to even call what the conservationists of the SSCS are doing ecoterrorism. I think what they're doing is justified. What say you??



That Japanese are in the law. The SS are not. Plus, who the hell really cares about "international law" whatever that is.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 7:16:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 4:26:43 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/18/2012 4:20:27 PM, Citrakayah wrote:
Given what we know of whales, there's a good likelihood that they're sentient. We don't exactly need to eat them (of course, we don't need to eat meat period). So why kill a probable sentient being?

You realize pigs could also be sentient right?

Yes, which is one of the reasons I don't eat them. That, and I'm Jewish.

I advocate vegetarianism, but I do think that whales are more likely to be sentient than pigs are.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 7:27:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 4:27:57 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/18/2012 12:33:32 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I'm normally against vigilante action, or taking the law into our own hands, but there are instances where laws are passed and countries sign on to treaties, then completely ignore them. That seems to be the case when it comes to the Japanese whaling fleet. They exploit a loophole that allows the killing of whales for scientific research, however the Japanese kill nearly a thousand whales every year, and the meat is sold in restaurants in Japan.

I've never supported groups like the Sea Shephard Conservation Society, shown in this documentary, but I was surprised to find myself rooting for them while watching it.

No country is giving Japan a challenge on this, so I find it difficult to even call what the conservationists of the SSCS are doing ecoterrorism. I think what they're doing is justified. What say you??



That Japanese are in the law. The SS are not. Plus, who the hell really cares about "international law" whatever that is.

You should, because all treaties are international laws. Moreover, if nobody had to care about international I can bet that a certain authoritarian country in the East would love to take over us.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 10:32:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 4:27:57 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/18/2012 12:33:32 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I'm normally against vigilante action, or taking the law into our own hands, but there are instances where laws are passed and countries sign on to treaties, then completely ignore them. That seems to be the case when it comes to the Japanese whaling fleet. They exploit a loophole that allows the killing of whales for scientific research, however the Japanese kill nearly a thousand whales every year, and the meat is sold in restaurants in Japan.

I've never supported groups like the Sea Shephard Conservation Society, shown in this documentary, but I was surprised to find myself rooting for them while watching it.

No country is giving Japan a challenge on this, so I find it difficult to even call what the conservationists of the SSCS are doing ecoterrorism. I think what they're doing is justified. What say you??



That Japanese are in the law. The SS are not. Plus, who the hell really cares about "international law" whatever that is.

Well if we don't care enough about international law to enforce it against one party then it's kind of hypocritical to enforce it against another party, involved in the same incident, right?? I mean if we're ignoring international law then there's no grounds for claiming that the Sea Shephard crew did anything wrong in taking direct action against the Japanese who were commercially whaling inside a recognized whale sanctuary.
ObiWan
Posts: 732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 11:12:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 12:18:59 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 10/18/2012 12:09:57 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 10/18/2012 11:54:07 AM, darkkermit wrote:
why does it matter if they kill whales by the thousands? We kill cows and pigs by the millions.

It isn't a moral argument. We can always make more pigs.

And? What good are the whales if you can't kill any at all?

What good are the whales if you can't kill them at all? Is that seriously your question? The purpose of every other species on the planet is not to be hunted and killed by humans. If the Japanese don't stop then there may not be any whales left to kill anyways.
These are not the droids you're looking for.
ObiWan
Posts: 732
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 11:14:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 12:07:40 PM, medic0506 wrote:
There are also farmers all over the world breeding and replacing those animals. That's a food source that won't be allowed to go extinct. The same can't be said for whales. In addition, they are at the top of the food chain, and threatening them with extinction, or severely reduced numbers, can have negative effects on that entire ecosystem.

This is pretty sums it up. No more whales would throw the entire marine ecosystem out of whack.
These are not the droids you're looking for.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2012 11:14:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 10:32:51 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/18/2012 4:27:57 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/18/2012 12:33:32 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I'm normally against vigilante action, or taking the law into our own hands, but there are instances where laws are passed and countries sign on to treaties, then completely ignore them. That seems to be the case when it comes to the Japanese whaling fleet. They exploit a loophole that allows the killing of whales for scientific research, however the Japanese kill nearly a thousand whales every year, and the meat is sold in restaurants in Japan.

I've never supported groups like the Sea Shephard Conservation Society, shown in this documentary, but I was surprised to find myself rooting for them while watching it.

No country is giving Japan a challenge on this, so I find it difficult to even call what the conservationists of the SSCS are doing ecoterrorism. I think what they're doing is justified. What say you??



That Japanese are in the law. The SS are not. Plus, who the hell really cares about "international law" whatever that is.

Well if we don't care enough about international law to enforce it against one party then it's kind of hypocritical to enforce it against another party, involved in the same incident, right?? I mean if we're ignoring international law then there's no grounds for claiming that the Sea Shephard crew did anything wrong in taking direct action against the Japanese who were commercially whaling inside a recognized whale sanctuary.

Because their using international law as their basis for doing this, which makes no sense.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2012 8:34:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 11:14:30 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/18/2012 10:32:51 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 10/18/2012 4:27:57 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/18/2012 12:33:32 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I'm normally against vigilante action, or taking the law into our own hands, but there are instances where laws are passed and countries sign on to treaties, then completely ignore them. That seems to be the case when it comes to the Japanese whaling fleet. They exploit a loophole that allows the killing of whales for scientific research, however the Japanese kill nearly a thousand whales every year, and the meat is sold in restaurants in Japan.

I've never supported groups like the Sea Shephard Conservation Society, shown in this documentary, but I was surprised to find myself rooting for them while watching it.

No country is giving Japan a challenge on this, so I find it difficult to even call what the conservationists of the SSCS are doing ecoterrorism. I think what they're doing is justified. What say you??



That Japanese are in the law. The SS are not. Plus, who the hell really cares about "international law" whatever that is.

Well if we don't care enough about international law to enforce it against one party then it's kind of hypocritical to enforce it against another party, involved in the same incident, right?? I mean if we're ignoring international law then there's no grounds for claiming that the Sea Shephard crew did anything wrong in taking direct action against the Japanese who were commercially whaling inside a recognized whale sanctuary.

Because their using international law as their basis for doing this, which makes no sense.

The basis for what they're doing is to save whales from extinction. They're trying to convince the international community to enforce its own bans that have been put in place for that very purpose.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2012 11:55:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 12:33:32 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I'm normally against vigilante action, or taking the law into our own hands, but there are instances where laws are passed and countries sign on to treaties, then completely ignore them. That seems to be the case when it comes to the Japanese whaling fleet. They exploit a loophole that allows the killing of whales for scientific research, however the Japanese kill nearly a thousand whales every year, and the meat is sold in restaurants in Japan.

I've never supported groups like the Sea Shephard Conservation Society, shown in this documentary, but I was surprised to find myself rooting for them while watching it.

No country is giving Japan a challenge on this, so I find it difficult to even call what the conservationists of the SSCS are doing ecoterrorism. I think what they're doing is justified. What say you??



I love watching them fail miserably.

1) If the whales are killed for science (GO SCIENCE!!), the rest of the whale should not be wasted.

2) 90% of the whales they hunt are Minke whales (935 out of their 1035 annual quota), which are classified as LC (Least Concern, the best ranking a species can have) on their conversation status.

3) The Minke whale population has been growing over the last 20 years.

4) South Korea and Norway also engage in whaling Minke for food (Norway actually hunts more of them).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2012 12:00:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/19/2012 11:55:51 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 10/18/2012 12:33:32 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I'm normally against vigilante action, or taking the law into our own hands, but there are instances where laws are passed and countries sign on to treaties, then completely ignore them. That seems to be the case when it comes to the Japanese whaling fleet. They exploit a loophole that allows the killing of whales for scientific research, however the Japanese kill nearly a thousand whales every year, and the meat is sold in restaurants in Japan.

I've never supported groups like the Sea Shephard Conservation Society, shown in this documentary, but I was surprised to find myself rooting for them while watching it.

No country is giving Japan a challenge on this, so I find it difficult to even call what the conservationists of the SSCS are doing ecoterrorism. I think what they're doing is justified. What say you??



I love watching them fail miserably.

1) If the whales are killed for science (GO SCIENCE!!), the rest of the whale should not be wasted.

2) 90% of the whales they hunt are Minke whales (935 out of their 1035 annual quota), which are classified as LC (Least Concern, the best ranking a species can have) on their conversation status.

This is for their southern ocean fleets.


3) The Minke whale population has been growing over the last 20 years.

4) South Korea and Norway also engage in whaling Minke for food (Norway actually hunts more of them).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2012 12:15:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/18/2012 1:00:56 PM, medic0506 wrote:
No one is saying that another whale can never again be killed, but there comes a point where you have stop and allow the population to recover.

Actually, in effect, that IS what is being said. The whale 'moratorium' is not based on the statements of the IWC's scientific committee that no whaling is sustainable right now-- said committee thinks quite the opposite. It is based on pressure from people who think exactly that-- that whales ought not be killed, under any circumstances except perhaps genuine scientific research, ever.

Say the whale population grows by five a year. If what you said were true, there would be no reason not to auction off at least one whale tag to the highest bidder. So why doesn't the IWC do that? Because it's not an honest if statist attempt at resource management. It's just pro-whale anti-human end of story.

What good are the whales if you can't kill them at all? Is that seriously your question? The purpose of every other species on the planet is not to be hunted and killed by humans.
There is no inherent purpose to any other species on the planet. Purpose and value are unique to rational beings, because they result from the choices of such beings. Whales, or any other nonrational creatures, have no value other than that we give them.

If the Japanese don't stop then there may not be any whales left to kill anyways.
Do you have evidence of this?

This is pretty sums it up. No more whales would throw the entire marine ecosystem out of whack.
"Balance of nature" without further evidence is a worthless trope. What do whales eat, and why don't we want more of it? Alternatively, what's in whale s*** and why do we want more of it?

The basis for what they're doing is to save whales from extinction.
The IWC scientific commission disagrees.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.