|
Yeah , thank you for the suggestion.
If it is a formal debate, then the act of unjustified killing by any means would not be acceptable and would be easily based on for this sort of argument.
But to those who selfishly value his own lives (or act like he only care about his own lives), it's just simply hard to let him realise his own stacks in the issue, without going so much on personal attacks...
@Larthak:
I agree that the point you mentioned was brought up quite a lots of time. But while wars killed lots of people, they simply just halt the rate of population growth, not stop them.
For example, Korean war, one of the deadliest one, halted the population of South Korean people for 7 years (If i remember correctly), but it rose by more than double to peak in 40 years time where it (almost) stopped. So even if we have another world war on every peaceful developing country, it will only halt the process for few years, before we still reach peak anyway (the current population of Europe without WW2 will not change much for example).
The main reason for population growth, was due to the high birth rate slowly decrease, but infant mortality quickly drop while life expectancy jump by huge amounts. IF we can control these, we can control the total population. Even China will peak its population soon, and with one-child policy, the population may start to drop like Japan (hopefully)
|