Logo:

32652 on a planet full of water

Certain countries always had the problem of fresh water, special in the Middle East, and south of North America. They survived this be being creative, it is this being creative that is taken away from most people as so-called democratic governments know best. They know it so well that there is now a severe shortness of fresh water. We can solve the problem just as the Israeli do, just steal it from others or reroute your neighbours supply to yourself, and if found out threatening your neighbour will help, and if they do not obey cut them off or kill them, Israel is even on this moment proven that this is a way to hold  the power. That Israel has direct access to a sea and could build enough un-silting plants would be a solution. However in Israel’s case that would mean spending money what could be spent on building more walls, prisons and nuclear weapons. And for a country as Israel the choice is an easy one, nuclear weapons have priority, the people can wait or die whatever comes first, and if they do not die Israel will oblige them to do it for them, again as they do at the moment, and as usual with US permission and help.


It is off course obvious that already fast amounts are spent on re-forming the country sides by building dams, reservoirs, pipelines etc. but not at the places where it is needed most. It also doubtful of this is done purely for the supply of drinking water or just for the many factories that need fresh water. It is a sign of time that most of those projects are always near industrial centres. The reason is obvious the ones who will hold the water will hold the power. It is here where that United Nations should play an important role, not in supplying reasons for yet another army protection yet another army who will protect yet another army in an situation created special for this scenario as we can see as done by the US in the Ukraine. And again we have to point to Israel who is the main reason that in South Lebanon a pro- Israeli UN force is keeping the peace. That is they protect Israel and help them to infiltrate South Lebanon, while at the same time acting as an occupation force to the people of South Lebanon. What a way to make friends and created peace. That UN army would not be needed if Israel was not so aggressive and always dead set on killing all what moves. The money saved could have been spent on creation fresh water in area's which need it most, the countries which do not have the money to take action themselves.


It is yet another point where the UN fails completely. Then again the UN is a talking group with the only actions known is to support the aggression of the USA and Europe (mainly the UK and Germany, (who else). We could continue to build more dams and exploit deeper and deeper aquifers; but even if you can afford it. However, this is not a cost-effective way of doing things, and that is it where the world goes wrong. It has to be cost-effective, but the question is WHY? We are talking here about humans and nature our way of life, does that has to be cost-effective. Is having large armies and military equipment, while there are no wars, unless started by that country itself, again mainly Israel, USA and the UK/Germany. Since when is having equipment laying around that is never used and need to be replaced to fit the new time, cost-effective?


Here is where the problem lays. Any head of state wants an army. That army needs generals, generals need officers and officers need man, and how more man they have the more important they feel, so they need more man. However with more man they have to give them a purpose; war! However, if the quantity of man runs out it has to be replaced by equipment, the more equipment, the more important they feel, so they need more equipment. The problem with equipment is that it is very expensive and quickly to old and has to be replaced, cost-effective, no certainly not, cost-wasting would be more to the point. It is a primitive state of mind, it being the mind of the US administration, and their aggressive allies. Only such primitive minds could have organised the destruction of the Ukraine, and then being too much of a coward to even admit it while the whole of the world knows it.


In such a mind greed is the main source of creativity, everything had to have its price, has to have a value, has to be controlled. However, why has the conservation of fresh water to be cost effective, we do not need armies with man and equipment we never need, grow old and have to be replaced. We need a proper infra structure to harness the world wide fresh water, creating new fresh water possibilities like un-silting plants expensive as they may be at the moment. Instead of wasting money on the over indulgence of generals who want to feel more important than other generals, presidents who want to be more powerful than other presidents, oligarch who want to be richer than the other oligarchs, we should use that money to safe guard fresh water, without it being cost-effective. Without trying to rip off the population with scaremongering and charged for water who are to high as it is just to give the share holders their luxury yachts.


Another problem is that supply of natural fresh water which in the past did not need cleaning now needs to be filtered, not because nature did change but because humans polluted it. Mainly agricultural and industrial pollution are the main danger to the supply of fresh water. The amount of chemicals that is used to pollute our fresh water and this for the silliest of reasons, although but mainly for the fact that making huge profits is more important is enormous. Already in the UK and the USA there are firms who are developing the possibility to make water an expensive commodity by restricting the sale other than by high charging prices, in the UK it now being up to £1.25 a day for one person, that is 4 bottles of supermarket water or 8 litres, indeed a high price to pay and we sitting only at the bottom price yet.


The Barotse Floodplain is a prime example where there was a complete faulty proposal for draining the wetland and developing an irrigation scheme. As it is shown before draining wetland is not always the solution to benefit the people. It will benefit the Industry, but not the people as it was clearly shown that by not draining the wetlands, the water supply, the fishery and the agricultural activity would be a much larger benefit. Here it is not a question of saying 'No we don't need any concrete infrastructure' - but it has to be built into the infrastructure and natural environment that addresses the needs of development, and the ecosystem needs of people and nature.


It is obvious from the discussion by inter government discussions, that governments and international institutions need to take water issues more seriously, as business does already and making the profits. They need to take it past the discussion stage and into the limelight. It needs an UN mandate to urge all nations to work together in this, even the countries who are only thinking on making money, such as the USA and the EU.


Look at the Bric group - Brazil, Russia, India and China - alone, "$800bn per year will be required by 2018 to cover investments in water infrastructure, this next to their action investments to work together to be strong and flexible. It is that last one that is missing from the USA and Europe. They are still insisting on wars for oil, instead of investments for water. The US and the EU are still in that primitive state of mind as that greed goes above the wellbeing of the people, look at Greece and UK where the governments pride themselves on how they impoverishing the population for their own wealth benefit.


At the time that the USA and Europe will realize that there is more in the world than killing people for oil, killing people for power, killing people for profit. They will see it is for the future and about the future, and there is indeed such an event as climate change bout they should worry even more with a fast growing world population in which the USA is one of the fastest growing population expansion growth.


Still we think that if God did create the world, he must have had a mysterious reason not to maintain the fresh water supply. As God in the Bible said, My ways are not your ways. We think mysterious that is the word.


 


 


Other pages:


This is the text-only version of this page. Click here to see this page with graphics.
Edit this page | Manage website
Make Your Own Website: 2-Minute-Website.com