So they're worthless? | Casulties and casulties

from Robb Force on 1:49 am on Sep. 27, 2001
...I think it has a lot to do with the nature of the events. An earthquake is a natural thing, bound to happen when you live in a seismically active area, while a terrorist attack is human against fellow human and should not have happened...

yep. that pretty much sums up how i feel about this.

i once saw a bit of henry rollins' stand-up act on comedy central, and one of the funnier bits was about people who live on flood planes, and even though their entire life gets washed away every few years or so, they're just too stupid to move.

and that brings me to another point: the reason why maybe so much less money was sunk into the earthquake relief was the simple fact that the best way to deal with a situation like that is to move right the fuck out of there, to a place that's NOT leveled every few years, or decades by a natural disaster. that's probably not something that india would exactly encourage, simply for economic reasons. but if people wanted to move, it'd pretty much involve a singular effor by everyone involved. i'm sure some people are going to help eachother, within the migratory group, but something like a terrorist attack on an entire nation, in this case, one that shocked most of the world, is going to get more solid support.

why? as i see it, the only way to stop world-wide terrorism is through a strong, joint effort by everyone involved. we're going to have to make sure that everyone is on the same page at all times just to stay on top of this.

i mean, there's no "war on earthquakes", to my knowledge. once again, there's little to nothing we can do to stop them. the only courses of action are to either prepare people and structures, or as i said earlier - move them the heck off the fault line.