In the recent past two people have won elections to stay in office, one a positive advance in politics while the other one could be a major step back. I am looking at particular the elections of Tadic and Kibaki.
I found the election in Kenya that lead to the re-election of Kibaki as president. This has lead to major violence that has been compared to the ethnic violence in Rwanda, which was never to have happened again. The violence if you do not know is between ethnic groups in the Rift Valley in Kenya, those that are in support of the current government and those that are in opposition. What I find the most shocking is how the 'western' 'civilized' world does not care or seem to care about what is happening. We say that will never again, but it has happened again and continue to happen in many places around the world.
The western world is prepared to go and invade a country that is not in the possible brink of civil war. But we are not prepared to stop governments who are attacking their own people. I know that I am pulling an example from Africa, when there are many other areas of the world that have issues and we should not just be picking on Africa. I will provide a list at some point of the countries that we in the west have forgotten about, who are going through major issues that cause people pain.
I do not know too much about how the issue of Kenya because I feel that we do not get a balanced view of the situation, and I have not been looking into the geopolitical dynamics of the region for many years.
The election of Tadic may have a completely different perspective. To my knowledge there has not be widespread dismay with his re-election as President of Serbia. He was running against a component that some people had feared would be a new Milosevic and would cause the Balkan region to be filled with war once again. The Balkans have been one of the bloodiest places in Europe, but not the world, and as caused the European community to look at who they are going to be. The major issue with the Serbian election was the issue of the response if (when) Kosovo would declare independence; which is expected shortly.
I feel that the EU is not doing enough in the Balkan region, if the European peoples are not able to support peace projects in their own back yards, how will we be able to support peace around the world. The EU I know is having issues over its own identity, but I think that the USA is have an affect on their 'nation' building. From stopping the EU from having a unified military, having many US troops there, and dividing the block with crazy ideas (missile shield). I use the world nation in the way that most people would consider it. A country is a nation, not a particular ethnic group or common history. It is true that most of Europe has a common history and ethnic group, but if Europe stays focused on this then they will never be able to adapt and change to remain strong in the future.
One of my highschool teachers thought me that empires and nations need remain open to new ideas other wise they will fall. The examples the teacher gave were Spain, France and Rome. I fear this is where the USA is heading, working by itself and spending too much time on small issues. Should the national government really care if people are doing drugs while being sports heroes??
The election of Tadic could create a new age in Europe when Europe can come together as a whole community and work together to solve the common issue of Kosovo. The election of Kibaki on the other hand could cause more political issues in a region of the world that has had too much violence. This region I am talking about is not Africa, I am talking about the Great Lakes region. The conflicts that have happened in that region have been major but in my view over looked, and they did just get hit by an earthquake. Both of these issues will test the western worlds response and hopefully create a peaceful world, I know I am an optimist
Yes I know I did a lot of posts in one day but this will be how many I will do a day. If I do not do this many a day I will forget about it and it will disappear into history.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Being Too Loud
Well, today just like most fun and exciting days I went to cheer on the hockey teams from my residence. Which I can cheer fairly loudly. I call myself coach of the team, I do not coach as much as motivate and cheer them on. I guess some people would consider this coaching, and I have a great time being on the bench. (I have also at times fixed some equipment in some sweet ways) So today was like any other day, I was cheering really loud and supporting my team.
That is when the scorekeeper told be I was being annoying and should stop. I could yell but not as much as I was currently doing. I am sure that the score keeper did not mean to insult me but I found this very upsetting. The scorekeeper also did not appear to really care about the game that was happening either, never paying attention so I did not feel like the person did not have any vested interest in the game.
I wanted to continue to support and cheer on my team but I did not want to make anybody mad. So I mad sure that I would still cheer but do a lesser degree, which maybe good because then I will not loose my voice. So I guess the whole situation could be positive in that I will not over do it from now on. But I would have wished to have had a more productive or constructive conversation with the scorekeeper.
This is not a big issue in the grand scheme things but I found it important enough to get off of my chest
That is when the scorekeeper told be I was being annoying and should stop. I could yell but not as much as I was currently doing. I am sure that the score keeper did not mean to insult me but I found this very upsetting. The scorekeeper also did not appear to really care about the game that was happening either, never paying attention so I did not feel like the person did not have any vested interest in the game.
I wanted to continue to support and cheer on my team but I did not want to make anybody mad. So I mad sure that I would still cheer but do a lesser degree, which maybe good because then I will not loose my voice. So I guess the whole situation could be positive in that I will not over do it from now on. But I would have wished to have had a more productive or constructive conversation with the scorekeeper.
This is not a big issue in the grand scheme things but I found it important enough to get off of my chest
Flying Like Crazy
Well I have been taking some classes about tourism, they have been two of the greatest classes ever, mostly for the people that have been in the class with me over the actual content of the courses. This story I found really interesting and hope that I can tie it into my course if at all possible.
The article was about the new airline that is starting which allows people when flying to take off all of their clothes. It is like a nudest resort in the air, it is operating in Germany which is a very nudest friendly location. This airline brought up a few issues for me, who rules the rules of air travel and what are the costs to the airline to have this airline.
I first thought of the issue of who controls air travel when a few years back there was an airline that was going to offer flights that would allow people to smoke on the planes. I wonder is this legal and why other airlines have stopped allowing people to smoke on the planes. I know the basic issue of how bad second hand smoking is and that it has been banded in most places (in progressive countries at least). What were the legal basis for the government to ban smoking on planes?? Also why are the bans on smoking extended to the Airports as well. The ban on smoking in an airport does not seem to make sense if the rest of the region where the airport is in does not have any bans on it.
To get back on the nudest flights, are there any legal reasons why this would not be able to happen. Also why, if there is such a demand for this service, this airline has not started sooner. I will not make any judgments about the people who would use this service, I am sure they are 'normal' people.
The other issue I was interested in is how much is it going to cost the airline to put this service in place. They are going to cover each of the chairs with towels that after each use will be washed. I have learned in my tourism classes that airlines can save a lot of money by reduce the amount of weight of the planes. I am sure that the weight of the towels will be but I am sure that they could affect fuel costs of the air line. I looked for the information I learned in class but I appeared to have lost it.
This airline is also just going to be traveling within Europe, which means the flights are not going to be 'long hall' ones. The use of traveling by plane in Europe is a terrible use of resources because Europe, unlike North America, has a sophisticated rail system. This means that the people, in my view, should not be flying, who cares what they are wearing (or not). Europeans do travel a lot within Europe, which should be only on the rails and not in the skies.
These are some of my thoughts when I read the story yesterday. The article can be found here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7223733.stm
The article was about the new airline that is starting which allows people when flying to take off all of their clothes. It is like a nudest resort in the air, it is operating in Germany which is a very nudest friendly location. This airline brought up a few issues for me, who rules the rules of air travel and what are the costs to the airline to have this airline.
I first thought of the issue of who controls air travel when a few years back there was an airline that was going to offer flights that would allow people to smoke on the planes. I wonder is this legal and why other airlines have stopped allowing people to smoke on the planes. I know the basic issue of how bad second hand smoking is and that it has been banded in most places (in progressive countries at least). What were the legal basis for the government to ban smoking on planes?? Also why are the bans on smoking extended to the Airports as well. The ban on smoking in an airport does not seem to make sense if the rest of the region where the airport is in does not have any bans on it.
To get back on the nudest flights, are there any legal reasons why this would not be able to happen. Also why, if there is such a demand for this service, this airline has not started sooner. I will not make any judgments about the people who would use this service, I am sure they are 'normal' people.
The other issue I was interested in is how much is it going to cost the airline to put this service in place. They are going to cover each of the chairs with towels that after each use will be washed. I have learned in my tourism classes that airlines can save a lot of money by reduce the amount of weight of the planes. I am sure that the weight of the towels will be but I am sure that they could affect fuel costs of the air line. I looked for the information I learned in class but I appeared to have lost it.
This airline is also just going to be traveling within Europe, which means the flights are not going to be 'long hall' ones. The use of traveling by plane in Europe is a terrible use of resources because Europe, unlike North America, has a sophisticated rail system. This means that the people, in my view, should not be flying, who cares what they are wearing (or not). Europeans do travel a lot within Europe, which should be only on the rails and not in the skies.
These are some of my thoughts when I read the story yesterday. The article can be found here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7223733.stm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)