Oder River in Poland Poisoned

[Page]

How did anyone think dumping chemical waste into a river was a really great idea?

This is definitely not a trade-off.

Illegal dumping is a mainstay of organised crime.

AKA capitalism. Tomato tomawwwto

[Kingdom of Lechia]

R.I.P. thousands of fish.

[Kingdom of Lechia]

Whoever is responsible should be prosecuted to fullest extent of the law. I’d make an example of them and use the charge of genocide.

Curious idea. Anyway, the Polish government has appointed one million zlotys (220 436 dollars) for for finding the perpetrators of the poisoning.

[Risottia]

How could anyone be so evil and heartless to effectively destroy an entire river?

It's very easy.
"I care about what's mine, screw everyone else and everything else".

I would be inclined to charge them with genocide.

And they would be acquitted for that. It isn't genocide.

[Hurdergaryp]

They literally don't. You can't be an eco-terrorist and destroy the environment. Eco-terrorists are first and foremost environmentalists; hence the "eco-" in the name.

They literally do. They are terrorists.

Ah, you're one of those. Having fun?

[The Huskar Social Union]

Well thats fucking awful.

I would be inclined to charge them with genocide.

wat

[San Lumen]

How could anyone be so evil and heartless to effectively destroy an entire river?

It's very easy.
"I care about what's mine, screw everyone else and everything else".

I would be inclined to charge them with genocide.

And they would be acquitted for that. It isn't genocide.

Wiping out an ecosystem isn’t genocide? Find I’d charge them with thousands of counts of murder.

Humans are a cancer on this planet.

[Haganham]

There is also ecoterrorist meaning a terrorist who targets the ecosystem.

That is not what ecoterrorism means.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/ecoterrorism
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ecoterrorist
https://www.google.com/search?q=ecoterrorism

[Lystigmark]

It's all over the news where I live. Some of saying that it might be some irresponsible greedy corporation, some say it could eco-terrorists (they already start forest fires), and of course some are saying it might be Russia's doing.

If Russia is behind this, I would support invoking article V immediately

[Lystigmark]

It's all over the news where I live. Some of saying that it might be some irresponsible greedy corporation, some say it could eco-terrorists (they already start forest fires), and of course some are saying it might be Russia's doing.

An environmental Terrorist destroys the environment. Eco-Terrorists are just regular terrorists with an environmentalist cause (which doesn't excuse their behavior).

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

That is not what ecoterrorism means.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/ecoterrorism
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ecoterrorist
https://www.google.com/search?q=ecoterrorism

Finally, the sometimes violent activities of some groups of environmental activists have been described as ecoterrorism. They include criminal trespass on the property of logging companies and other firms and obstruction of their operations, sometimes through the sabotage of company equipment or the environmentally harmless modification of natural resources in order to make them inaccessible or unsuitable for commercial use. Examples of this practice, known as “monkeywrenching,” are the plugging of factory waste outlets and driving spikes into trees so that they cannot be logged and milled. Other activities described as ecoterrorist include protest actions by animal rights groups, which have included the destruction of property in stores that sell products made of fur and the bombing of laboratories that perform experiments on animals.

this is what almost everyone uses that term to mean.

this seems to be the result of syntactic confusion as to whether “environmental terrorist” means “environmentalist terrorist” or “terrorist who targets the environment”, in the same vein as “historical linguist”.

[Ifreann]

It's very easy.
"I care about what's mine, screw everyone else and everything else".



And they would be acquitted for that. It isn't genocide.

Wiping out an ecosystem isn’t genocide?

No.

Find I’d charge them with thousands of counts of murder.

No one has died.

Humans are a cancer on this planet.

Speak for yourself.

[San Lumen]

Wiping out an ecosystem isn’t genocide?

No.

Find I’d charge them with thousands of counts of murder.

No one has died.

Humans are a cancer on this planet.

Speak for yourself.

I’d change the definition.

When you look at how much damage we’ve done it’s hard to see how we aren’t. We need to remove all things toxic from society and whatever the cost and losses are it’s acceptable.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

No.

No one has died.


Speak for yourself.

I’d change the definition.

When you look at how much damage we’ve done it’s hard to see how we aren’t. We need to remove all things toxic from society and whatever the cost and losses are it’s acceptable.

Genocide

1. The systematic and widespread extermination or attempted extermination of a national, racial, religious, or ethnic group.
2. The systematic killing of a racial or cultural group.
3. The systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of ethnicity, religion, political opinion, social status, or other particularity.
4. Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or a significant portion of, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.
5. systematic killing of a racial or cultural group

I don’t think fish count as a national, racial, religious, or ethnic group. nor do they count as “people”, at least yet. certainly you could make something like this a major crime without making it genocide specifically.

[The Huskar Social Union]

No.

No one has died.


Speak for yourself.

I’d change the definition.

Course you would

When you look at how much damage we’ve done it’s hard to see how we aren’t. We need to remove all things toxic from society and whatever the cost and losses are it’s acceptable.

Hahahaha

[Haganham]

https://www.britannica.com/topic/ecoterrorism
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ecoterrorist
https://www.google.com/search?q=ecoterrorism

Finally, the sometimes violent activities of some groups of environmental activists have been described as ecoterrorism. They include criminal trespass on the property of logging companies and other firms and obstruction of their operations, sometimes through the sabotage of company equipment or the environmentally harmless modification of natural resources in order to make them inaccessible or unsuitable for commercial use. Examples of this practice, known as “monkeywrenching,” are the plugging of factory waste outlets and driving spikes into trees so that they cannot be logged and milled. Other activities described as ecoterrorist include protest actions by animal rights groups, which have included the destruction of property in stores that sell products made of fur and the bombing of laboratories that perform experiments on animals.

this is what almost everyone uses that term to mean.

this seems to be the result of syntactic confusion as to whether “environmental terrorist” means “environmentalist terrorist” or “terrorist who targets the environment”, in the same vein as “historical linguist”.

Words often have more then one meaning.

It's very easy.
"I care about what's mine, screw everyone else and everything else".



And they would be acquitted for that. It isn't genocide.

Wiping out an ecosystem isn’t genocide? Find I’d charge them with thousands of counts of murder.

Humans are a cancer on this planet.

Genocide is about intent. If you destroyed the river with the intent of destroying the people who depend on it, and those people were an identifiable group, then it would be genocide.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

this is what almost everyone uses that term to mean.

this seems to be the result of syntactic confusion as to whether “environmental terrorist” means “environmentalist terrorist” or “terrorist who targets the environment”, in the same vein as “historical linguist”.

Words often have more then one meaning.

I’m aware of that. I’m also aware that “ecoterrorist” is (at least in the US) much more commonly used to refer to environmentalist terrorism than environmental terrorism, and that the ambiguity of the term “ecoterrorist” means that the longer forms should be used.

[Khurkhogur]

This sounds like a job for Captain Planet.

No, this sounds like a job for Polish people

[Risottia]

Wiping out an ecosystem isn’t genocide?

No.

Find I’d charge them with thousands of counts of murder.

Too bad that there haven't been thousands of murders.

Humans are a cancer on this planet.

Have you considered giving the good example by removing yourself from this neoplastic society? There's plenty of uninhabited islands where you can move.

Seriously, this kind of discourse only turns ecology into low-quality banter.

[Ifreann]

No.

No one has died.


Speak for yourself.

I’d change the definition.

No one cares about your stupid power fantasies. Killing animals isn't genocide, no matter how much more you value fish than human beings.

When you look at how much damage we’ve done it’s hard to see how we aren’t. We need to remove all things toxic from society and whatever the cost and losses are it’s acceptable.

We treat cancer by killing it. Do you want to kill people?

[San Lumen]

I’d change the definition.

No one cares about your stupid power fantasies. Killing animals isn't genocide, no matter how much more you value fish than human beings.

When you look at how much damage we’ve done it’s hard to see how we aren’t. We need to remove all things toxic from society and whatever the cost and losses are it’s acceptable.

We treat cancer by killing it. Do you want to kill people?

No we simply remove all things toxic and whatever loses there are it’s acceptable.

[Danktopia]

@Page based.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

No one cares about your stupid power fantasies. Killing animals isn't genocide, no matter how much more you value fish than human beings.


We treat cancer by killing it. Do you want to kill people?

No we simply remove all things toxic and whatever loses there are it’s acceptable.

> simply
> remove everything with any level of toxicity
uh huh

[Salus Maior]

They literally don't. You can't be an eco-terrorist and destroy the environment. Eco-terrorists are first and foremost environmentalists; hence the "eco-" in the name.

They literally do. They are terrorists.

Why don't you source it?

[Salus Maior]

Hopefully they'll find the cause soon. If it was Russian sabotage, that'd be pretty diabolical.