Is ending the global hunger crisis more important than ending wars?

Asked by: JohnnyC
  • Yes, Less Hunger Would Result in Less Aggression

    Ending the global hunger crisis would help end wars, so ending hunger
    should come first. Nations with enough food to feed their people, and
    especially nations with surplus food to sell abroad, are less likely to be
    aggressive troublemakers on the world stage. Well-fed people are more
    satisfied with life, naturally, and less likely to pick quarrels. Systematic
    attacks on hunger would give developed nations more peace and security,
    as well as increasing their popularity around the world.

  • The global hunger crisis is a result of overpopulation

    It's a known fact that we as humans are reaching an environmentally unsustainable population level. Solving the global hunger crisis simply cannot be done, as we will simply keep growing in number and eventually annihilate ourselves by using up all necessary resources. Thus, the hunger crisis is simply a means of population control which is very necessary for humanity.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
gt4o2007 says2013-06-11T07:07:25.820
You can't solve one without the other.
Alexandir says2013-06-11T10:04:33.967
I for one would say yes. No one deserves to die from hunger, that's just cruel