If a warlord hijacks and destroys food it is not the same as there not being enough food.
2006-12-01 06:50:22 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Food is rotting all around the world because the big money people can not make all the profit they want from it. So they just let it rot. add political corruption and millions starve. Mexico could easely feed it's self if the mexican people had enough guts to fight back, istead of running north and corrupting the US too...Asia and Africa have plenty of resources... but where is all of it going.. into the rich pockets... not the starving bellies.... it is up to the people to fight, and die if necessary, to get what is theirs... but religious and ethnic hatered is also a great contributor to keeping the people hungry.
2006-12-01 07:00:45 · answer #1 · answered by idahomike2 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes but there still would have been enough food to go around if it wasn't for people like the warlords
The problem is how to get it to the starving people
2006-12-01 14:55:39 · answer #2 · answered by goldenbrowngod 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, there is not enough food available for consumption. Is that better? There is not enough infrastructure to make food available to all people in the world that may need it. So saying 'there is not enough food' is not false, its just not the best selection of terms.
2006-12-01 14:55:19 · answer #3 · answered by Crystal P 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People are sheeple. They'll believe anything the right person tells them.
2006-12-01 15:00:13 · answer #4 · answered by flip4449 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
lack of education, and misinformation. seperatism, not taking responsibility for the state of the planet- not seeing the rest of the world as our brothers and sisters, to not see the inter-connectedness of humanity.
thanks for spreading the awarness, it helps, every little bit helps!
http://www.one.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
2006-12-01 15:02:17 · answer #5 · answered by zentrinity 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋