Opinions on Whale Wars?

[Helmholtz Watson]

Would you care to list out their results?

What results?

They have reduced [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17312460] the whalers intake.

 

[Doom972]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco_terrorism

Critics of this use of the term argue that it has been defined in order to vilify activists, and that the term would be more properly employed to describe the environmentally damaging activities of corporations.

I agree! Good link!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Whaling_Commission

IWC is a voluntary international organization and is not backed up by treaty. Therefore, the IWC, in essence, is a voluntary organization which has substantial practical limitations on its authority. First, any member countries are free to simply leave the organization and declare themselves not bound by it if they so wish. Second, any member state may opt out of any specific IWC regulation by lodging a formal objection to it within 90 days of the regulation coming into force[21] (such provisions are common in international agreements, on the logic that it is preferable to have parties remain within the agreements than opt out altogether). Third, the IWC has no ability to enforce any of its decisions through penalty imposition.

Good explanation of why the IWC is a fundamentally toothless organization! Good link again!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy

As my argument is that your statement that humans must never be hurt in order to preserve animal life is absurdly anthropocentric to the point of being actively dangerous, I'm not certain where you see me assuming a hypocritical stance, nor why you think posting links to the IWC and Eco-Terrorism is in any way, shape or form a rebuttal to that assertion. Perhaps you are unclear on the definition of hypocrisy? The link you have provided may offer some insight.

Take that!

No, that was excellent, thank you. Good to know we're on the same page.

You clearly have much more time on your hands and determination for absurd forum arguments that don't lead to any result whatsoever. Congratulations! I declare you king of the useless arguments.

Oh, and the hypocrisy remark was about people who kill some animals (cockroaches, rats, flies), while defending others (whales, dogs, seals).

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

You clearly have much more time on your hands and determination for absurd forum arguments that don't lead to any result whatsoever. Congratulations! I declare you king of the useless arguments.

Oh, and the hypocrisy remark was about people who kill some animals (cockroaches, rats, flies), while defending others (whales, dogs, seals).

Well thats an obvious strawman. Im fine killing flies. I wouldnt be fine killing the LAST fly or the last of about 100 flies. Biodiversity is important. If the world was fucking stuffed with whales where we had whales up the wazoo i wouldnt defend them. But we dont. Some are critically indangered. Its not hypocracy to say "Its ok to kill some animals, but lets not kill ALL of them so they die out and we never see them again because thats short sighted idiocy". You dont even believe anyone takes that stance. I dont want to think you do. Its just easier to argue against.

 

[Baron von Blitztank]

That show is so overrated!
Personally I prefer R'lyeh Wars! Much more gripping stuff and atleast there they have a good enough reason to ram their ship at things!

 

[Omgsarge]

Well its many reasons.

1. Whaling employs people. If it dies, thats a whole lot of unemployed workers. Something Japan doesn't want. Even down sizing is practically off the table, Japan's Economy is too weak right now to take a hit like that. The Economy has been in a death spiral since the 1990s. Japan goes down, and you are looking at possible shit storms in the Asian markets. Something that could play hell on stock markets around the world.

2. They only do research because the UN told them to. If the UN didn't step in, Japan would still be hunting common Minke whales instead of "researching" endangered ones.

3. The only reason this is an issue at all is because its all filled with rhetoric and general misconceptions. Usually brought on by media.

4. There IS demand, its just that whale meat is banned everywhere. Any place outside Japan that even tries to SELL whale meat gets shut down immediately. The UN refuses to allow whale meat to be sent anywhere. The reason why they don't pass it out to starving areas like Africa is beyond me, usually stupidity and political dogma.

whaling is only a problem because people adhere to political dogma rather than think of it in a utilitarian sense.

They rather treat political parties like religions and adhere to political "bibles" than think outside the box. Both sides do this, so this is the only reason whaling is even an issue.

Don't know about your 4th point. In my time in Norway, I saw a restaurant that proudly sells whale meat with potatoes so I don't know if its banned everywhere. I think export of whale meat is just frowned upon. Seems like Norway, Iceland and Japan still commonly trade whale meat between each other.

Also, whale meat is often heavily contaminated with toxins since they are so far down the food chain. So, its not really the greatest of meat and whale oil, the main reason whales were hunted, does not really have a place in today's global economy anymore. Seems to me the only reason the Japanese whaling industry still actually exists is clinging to a dying tradition and heavy subsidies from the government. Japan would be wise to invest that money into the creation of jobs with a future and not into an industry that can't maintain itself, if its really about employment.
http://www.wdcs.org/submissions_bin/economics_whaling_report.pdf

 

[Haukur Isleifsson]

I think whales should be hunted in a restricted and self-sustainable manner. Some types of whales are endangered and should not be hunted others are not and should be. I don't know which whales the Japanese are hunting so I can't comment on the morality of the actions being taken against them.

Also...

We must recognize that there are other factors that whaling that have profound affects on the number of whales. Availability of food for the whales and pollution both factoring in quite heavily. So So I think that people that are truly concerned about the well-being of whales have other more legitimate, and perhaps more moral, ways of propagating it.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Would you care to list out their results?

What results?

They have reduced [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17312460] the whalers intake.

Long-term result? No. Soon the japanese will find a way to fight back and the Whale Idiots won't be able to do jack about it.

Says you. I don't see that happening any time soon.

 

[juyunseen]

I used to watch the show (seasons 2 and 3) and while after that point I started to dislike their methods, I can't say I disagree with them being there since they are the only ones doing anything.
They have been charged (and jailed on some occasions), and despite totally being the self ritous pricks that you say they are, there is proof that they have made a dent into the illegal whaling operations.
They're assholes, yes, but at least they've gotten some results (at the expense of any credibility they used to have)

 

[White Lightning]

Goddamnit, with a thread titled "Whale Wars" I thought this was going to be some badass Whale on Whale action, but NOOOOOOOOOOOO just a bunch of stupid hippies.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Paul Watson is well-intentioned, but terribly misguided, and honestly, he's a bit of an attention whore. There's fostering sustainability and responsible industry, and then there's eco-terrorism, which can and does endanger human lives.

But, of course, when you've got hot Discovery Channel money pouring in, who honestly cares?

I'm seriously waiting for the day when someone in Tokyo flips a table and decides to take the fight not to Watson, not to Greenpeace or any decent, sedate environmental defence group, but to Discovery itself. They're enabling illegal and reckless behaviour for the sake of audience appeal and because it's righteous and stuff. Dur, people like righteous stuff on TV, it's good entertainment, so money!

That's really no excuse. Someone in Discovery Channel's upper management needs to be the bigger man and recognize that while whaling is bad, reckless endangerment is also something that needs to be condemned. There has to be a sedate way to get the Japanese whalers to lower their quotas without bombarding their decks with water cannons or ramming their ships.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Paul Watson is well-intentioned, but terribly misguided, and honestly, he's a bit of an attention whore. There's fostering sustainability and responsible industry, and then there's eco-terrorism, which can and does endanger human lives.

But, of course, when you've got hot Discovery Channel money pouring in, who honestly cares?

I'm seriously waiting for the day when someone in Tokyo flips a table and decides to take the fight not to Watson, not to Greenpeace or any decent, sedate environmental defence group, but to Discovery itself. They're enabling illegal and reckless behaviour for the sake of audience appeal and because it's righteous and stuff. Dur, people like righteous stuff on TV, it's good entertainment, so money!

That's really no excuse. Someone in Discovery Channel's upper management needs to be the bigger man and recognize that while whaling is bad, reckless endangerment is also something that needs to be condemned. There has to be a sedate way to get the Japanese whalers to lower their quotas without bombarding their decks with water cannons or ramming their ships.

Technically, the show was proposed by Animal Planet. Discovery bought airing rights, but they weren't the ones responsible for sending the camera crews.

 

[SpectacularWebHead]

Its a lesser of two evils kinda thing isnt it.

On one hand we have the Whalers who hunt an already endangered species.

On the other hand we have a twat called Paul Watson trying desperately to be some kind of sea vigilante.

He's not the hero the whales deserve, but the one it needs. A wet protector. A fishy watchman.
A whale Knight.

 

[kasperbbs]

I'm pretty sure that they should be locked up for this. I don't support whaling, but i don't think that endangering the lives of people who are just trying to make a living for a shitty TV show is ok. South park episode about whale wars pretty much sums up my opinion of them, but i have to confess that i haven't actually seen a single episode of it and don't plan to anytime soon.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Self-snip!

Technically, the show was proposed by Animal Planet. Discovery bought airing rights, but they weren't the ones responsible for sending the camera crews.

My point still stands, then. Animal Planet really should do something about it in a more legal manner. Just sitting there because this guy's all pro-whales and because it's a good show is really hypocritical. I don't care how Japanese whalers are overdoing it if the only response they managed to support and endorse involves a glory hog who endangers other human beings recklessly.

There has to be a way to solve the bigger issue of whaling in a courtroom.

 

[Loonyyy]

Its a lesser of two evils kinda thing isnt it.

On one hand we have the Whalers who hunt an already endangered species.

On the other hand we have a twat called Paul Watson trying desperately to be some kind of sea vigilante.

He's not the hero the whales deserve, but the one it needs. A wet protector. A fishy watchman.
A whale Knight.

Made my night.

Sure, they're attention-seeking, and the incident where they boarded a whaling ship and then called it "Terrorism" when they were detained for doing so was stupid hyperbole. That said, I have to think that chucking stink bombs at scumbags who'd butcher whales is pretty fucking awesome. I'd pay for the chance to do that. Not particularly effective-but awesome.

The sailor in me doesn't like the idea of fucking with people's ships, but at the same time, you can't keep butchering endangered species in such a spectacularly stupid fashion and expect to get away with it. We've tried legislating against it, and they call it research and continue. It's BS. For comparison: The Aurora Australis, an Australian research vessel, had machine guns mounted for use on illegal fishing boats. Supposedly to take out the motor. Whether they can avoid hurting people using that I'll leave up to you. But that's what the government is willing to endorse. Recklessly driving boats and throwing stink bombs really doesn't compare in my mind.

 

[direkiller]

Paul Watson is well-intentioned, but terribly misguided, and honestly, he's a bit of an attention whore. There's fostering sustainability and responsible industry, and then there's eco-terrorism, which can and does endanger human lives.

But, of course, when you've got hot Discovery Channel money pouring in, who honestly cares?

I'm seriously waiting for the day when someone in Tokyo flips a table and decides to take the fight not to Watson, not to Greenpeace or any decent, sedate environmental defence group, but to Discovery itself. They're enabling illegal and reckless behaviour for the sake of audience appeal and because it's righteous and stuff. Dur, people like righteous stuff on TV, it's good entertainment, so money!

That's really no excuse. Someone in Discovery Channel's upper management needs to be the bigger man and recognize that while whaling is bad, reckless endangerment is also something that needs to be condemned. There has to be a sedate way to get the Japanese whalers to lower their quotas without bombarding their decks with water cannons or ramming their ships.

Technically, the show was proposed by Animal Planet. Discovery bought airing rights, but they weren't the ones responsible for sending the camera crews.

animal planet is owned by Discovery Communication
They also own TLC & Military channel(along with all the Discovery channles)

 

[SpectacularWebHead]

Its a lesser of two evils kinda thing isnt it.

On one hand we have the Whalers who hunt an already endangered species.

On the other hand we have a twat called Paul Watson trying desperately to be some kind of sea vigilante.

He's not the hero the whales deserve, but the one it needs. A wet protector. A fishy watchman.
A whale Knight.

Made my night.

Sure, they're attention-seeking, and the incident where they boarded a whaling ship and then called it "Terrorism" when they were detained for doing so was stupid hyperbole. That said, I have to think that chucking stink bombs at scumbags who'd butcher whales is pretty fucking awesome. I'd pay for the chance to do that. Not particularly effective-but awesome.

The sailor in me doesn't like the idea of fucking with people's ships, but at the same time, you can't keep butchering endangered species in such a spectacularly stupid fashion and expect to get away with it. We've tried legislating against it, and they call it research and continue. It's BS. For comparison: The Aurora Australis, an Australian research vessel, had machine guns mounted for use on illegal fishing boats. Supposedly to take out the motor. Whether they can avoid hurting people using that I'll leave up to you. But that's what the government is willing to endorse. Recklessly driving boats and throwing stink bombs really doesn't compare in my mind.

Ah, the ever convenient terrorist label? That word's getting bandied around by so many different groups of people it's lost all meaning. I'm torn about this issue. I kind of agree with you, because endangering lives is just unnacceptable, but on the other, whaling is insanely cruel, largely due to their method of killing the whales. It's a long, horrible proccess through most of which the whale is alive. I've been sort of following the whaling issue for a while, and everything I've seen leads me to at least understand why the extremism has popped up. I don't condone it, but people have been peacefully protesting whaling since like, the 60's and very little has changed. So yeah, I'm torn between supporting the incident and feeling these people needed to be taken to court.