Now the Australians are threatening us. They’ll send the Military to stop the Japanese Whaling. How about NO?

Question

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/11/15/eawhale115.xml

How about they try to focus on something more efficient rather than wasting time sending their military here.

If we don’t do something about GLOBAL WARMING first, the whale population will be drastically affected by climate change ANYWAY. Then there would have been no point halting Japanese whaling.

Australians seem to be forgetting the speed and efficiency of the Japanese in building an eco-friendly country. Let's try to recognize the priorities.

................

(My mother: “Greenpeace? Sea Shepherds? I’m sorry, they’re a bunch of idiots.”)

Note: I have never in my life eaten whales or dolphins.

Whaling is a tradition in our country. The Japanese aren't idiots for slaughtering them - we're just continuing this tradition. And I never said that Greenpeace are idiots - my mother did. Ask her.

Intelligence is the worst excuse for not killing and eating whales. If whales shouldn't be eaten because they're intelligent, does that mean it's acceptable to eat humans if they were dumb?

Answer 1

the japanese commercial fleet have named this whaling expedition 'operation migaloo'.

migaloo is the world's only white whale, and the japanese have openly stated their determination to hunt her down and kill her.

if australia directly attack any japanese whaling ship in international waters, that is an act of war. i very much doubt that will happen.

if however they merely damage a whaling ship's nets that would be a minor act of piracy and would likely go before the international tribunal of the law of the sea. the australians realise that japan would be very unlikely to get a favourable verdict if that happen.

i can understand why you would want to agree with your mother, most young women do. most of the rest of the world would see your mother's statement as outrageous.

at the moment australia has the world's public opinion on its side, as long as it applies only moderate pressure to the japanese whaling program things will stay that way. the question is whether japanese determination to save face is strong enough to drive the country to take on the whole world again.

since you don't have a problem with killing one of the most intelligent animals on the planet for food (do you really mean that you would be happy to eat a person of low iq?) perhaps you won't have a problem either with the immense cruelty of slaughtering whales.

a large whale will typically die of trauma and bloodloss after being harpooned. this can take ten hours of thrashing against the cable until shock causes the major organs to shut down.

often much longer.

Answer 2

They are only planning on taking evidence at this stage and won't actually stop the ships.

As for doing something about global warming, Australia should be removing the stupid three mines policy which will allow for the supply of fuel for the nuclear industry (and given that Australia contributes about a percent of global warming allowing other countries to reduce their emissions is more important than reducing Australian emissions).

Back in the olden days of Whaling the IWC which was set up to conserve whales was allowing a free for all which severely depleted whale stock so there really does need to be someone willing to conserve the resources although by now the Japanese could probably be trusted not to overharvest (they are getting pretty good at sustainable fishing) so it would then just be a question of whether the whales are intelligent beings (in which case not using a warship to stop whaling would be unethical) or not intelligent (in which case the warships should be stopping Greenpeace and Sea Shepherds).

Answer 3

How about yes? And hopefully a few more of the world's navies will join them!

I think it's time we drop the economic hammer on Japan and boycott them across the board as well!

There is even a neat website (see link below) called "Boycott Japan" that has some detailed and interesting information on how to boycott products from Japan and get the anti-whaling message to these people.

I'm not an advocate of anyone going to extreme measures to enforce (no matter how right, just and humane) an act on another society.

In this case though I'm sick of the arrogance and disregard Japan displays to the world (be it historical revisionism in the atrocities they committed in WWII or whaling) that I think heavy handed measures should be taken.

I'd be thrilled to see the world's navies intercept these whaling ships, order the crews off, haul them into ports and scrap them.

The stance that this is a "cultural" aspect of Japan's society is a joke. These are the same people that used sex slaves for the army as late as WWII.

Oh... and stop hiding behind your mommy's skirts on, "not calling Greenpeace idiots." If you thought that was really offensive you wouldn't have even posted in your question / additional details section. Show some backbone.

Answer 4

Whaling is bad, everyone knows that including the Japanese.
However Australia has no mandate for the international community (that I know of) to take unilateral action against another sovereign nation.
I doubt the Australians would welcome Japanese stopping the Australians diving on coral reefs and killing the coral. Coral is alive!
They can do fly by's and then can take pictures but military action, no they cannot do that unless an internal mandate is given.
Public opinion in Japan is the only way to stop this. Change the Japanese way of viewing whales as food and you have won ...

Answer 5

I hope the Australian Navy blow them out of the water, I'm sorry but some people think they can do whatever the want no matter how cruel it is, Australians are not the only country against Japanese whaling, just the only country willing to do something about it.

Answer 6

An excellent question! As far as I'm concerned, those descriptions of God are badly mistaken, and I'm happy for those who reject such notions. I also think you've got a good handle on the problem--except that you've mistaken the attitudes of some theists for God's attitude. The Christian God is not just the creator and rule of the universe. He's also the ultimate standard of morality. It follows that he is better than any of the people who preach about him. He is, most particularly, a lot better than the people who depict him as an instrument of their own ill will. The Hebrew scripture started out with an idea of God that was not much different from the usual occupants of pagan pantheons: he was mostly concerned with his own status, with elbowing other gods out of the way, and with demanding devotion from humans. He was a little different, in that he was more exclusive, not sharing his followers with any other gods. And he made a particular claim on the speakers of Hebrew. But quite a few of the later Hebrew scriptures started to refine that notion. Their God was exclusive BECAUSE he was somehow better than other gods. He was more real (Isaiah). He was the god of all nations, not just the Hebrew speakers (Jeremiah). He was a loving god (David). He was less concerned with ritual worship than with decency and social equity (Amos). Slowly, these writers worked on the question of what would really make a god the ultimate God. Eventually, they had developed the idea of a God who was good, and that was what made him important. That is the idea that Jesus preached. He didn't introduce it--it was a popular notion in first-century Judean religion. But he did develop it into a direct challenge to religion as an institution. And there is actually nothing recorded in his teaching that says God "will send you to hell for doubting his holy word." What he described was a God who takes extraordinary measures to keep us from wandering into hell on our own. Some Christians, and some Christian preachers, fail to understand this. Somehow, they were raised with the idea that a "moody, abusive parent" was all we could expect, and so that's how they depict God. In my view, they are wrong. And there are many, many Christians who see it about the same way as I do. ‘A man can’t be taken to hell, or sent to hell: you can only get there on your own steam.’ -- C.S. Lewis, "The Dark Tower" [unfinished novel] Roper: My god wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! More: Are you sure that’s God? He sounds like Moloch. -- Robert Bolt, "A Man for All Seasons"

Answer 7

Australia is a first-class hypocrite nation when it comes to the environment, no question. I live in Tasmania and we are clearing native forests with 500+-year old trees at a rate that would do a developing country proud, and we chip the trees and send them to you guys (Japan) to make paper for packaging. The Tasmanian Devil is being wiped out and is now endangered, being killed by nasty chemicals sprayed around by plantation forest owners (after they clear-fell the native forest, they put in plantation and poison the herbivores, which are then eaten by carnivores such as the Devil).

Our politicians love the whale debate because it's easy in Australia, like arguing for motherhood. It lets guys like McClelland appeal to the green vote without actually doing anything that will offend party donors (his party is 100% behind Tasmanian forest destruction).

Yes, we are utter hypocrites.

But as long as Japan pretends to be whaling for 'scientific research', when in fact you're just into eating endangered animals, people will oppose you. Our wrong does not cancel out yours. Japan should stop whaling and Australia should do something about its massive greenhouse gas emissions.

Answer 8

Australia is a civilized country and would not use it's military to stop any lawful activity. The media frequently exaggerates.

Many people think global warming is a myth. Keep in mind that 30 years a go everyone was afraid that the planet was getting colder. Time or Newsweek had a cover story on this very topic. Just keep an open mind and try to look at both sides of the global warming issue.

For someone who's against Global Warming, Al Gore certainly does a lot to contribute to it. Last year a newspaper obtained the utility bills for his mansion in Tennessee and I believe he spends about ten times more than the average resident in that state. He is a rich man and can afford to use solar and other alternative energy sources.

Answer 9

yes stop/control whaling AND global warming at the same time.Once you wipe out a species its all over then its too late to say oh by the way we need to monitor whaling.You cannot leave it up to the public to monitor their own actions.Most will but there is always that group that will kill a species down to the last one out of greed

Answer 10

Hi,the Japanese want stopping.I for one will be glad if Austalia do some thing to stop the slaughter.You say Green Peace are idiots how would you like to be slaughtered & what for.