Can Africa be ecologically engineered, with enough help from outside nations...

It would be controlled by north Africans or Chinese probably

>A white owning a patch of desert won't utilize it any better than a black.

In b4 Rhodesiafags.

Why waste the time and money doing this to help an unstable shit hole?

Assuming you had the resources to do this to the Sahara it would be infinitely more profitable to do this to the Australian desert. They already have large agricultural output and opening up their interior would be like the USAs manifest destiny.

The African plan would require the consent and cooperation of dozens of different Governments, Australia is a single stable nation.

Oh yeah, the intensive european colonization focusing on the Bolivian Andes. And I'm not arguing for instant privatization for profit, I was under the impression that since some international concert would be funding it, an international concert would also be making sure that it goes into the right hands.

Kill nationalism, make it about "humanity" instead of "my tribe", and we will fix everything.
Its very hard through, especially when that guy trying it looks like Satan.

African blacks are mentally imcapable of gratitude they see you helping them as what you are supposed to do for them not an obligation of your own will.

Waste of time they will tell you to fuck off once you are done then fuck it up.

I couldn't think of a worse way to fix Africa than what you just said.

Why not Australia as well? My reasoning for why not is that it can manage itself, whereas many african nations obviously cannot. There's no point in helping those that arn't in need.
Completely false. Africa isn't failed because 'my tribe,' it's failed because 'muh shekels'

black people are naturally too stupid to help.

they're a liability to the human race.

I would be better for the human race if they were all sterilised.

I think that's what aid sent to africa should focus on.

>Completely false. Africa isn't failed because 'my tribe,' it's failed because 'muh shekels'

1. Africa is shit because of corruption, it doesn't have institutions and nobody profits from giving them institutions.
2. I meant worldwide. Notice I said humanity. There are humans outside of Africa, you racist.

Just wait until mass gene editing becomes practical and then uplift them to asian levels of intelligence.

>1. Africa is shit because of corruption, it doesn't have institutions and nobody profits from giving them institutions.
That's what I said, muh shekels.

>2. I meant worldwide. Notice I said humanity. Even worldwide, greed is a bigger problem than racism. Do you really believe that the reason for why things are bad is because a lack of tolerance? I hate porkyposting, but seriously, you don't see anyone sharing anything just because they have something in common.

If anything, we need more tribalism and less shekels.

>The Sahara being somehow turned into lush grassland would increase arable land by seventy percent. Imagine if the Kongo was repurposed for the same ideal, or if the Amazon was, for that matter.
Are you under the impression the only reason no one has tried to make the Sahara desert arable is lack of interest? Do you have any concept of the astronomical amount of work, time, and money it would cost to make even one hectare of desert arable? The sheer logistics of trying to repurpose a 120F at day, 40F at night, no natural water for hundreds of miles, arid wasteland to farmland that would require around the clock management, an entire new infrastructure network to transport the goods to people, and the billions of othwr intricacies involved in growing food? And your only CONCEIVABLE counterrarguments are that people are greedy or don't want to help black people? God dammit OP do some critical thinking.

You are part of the problem.

I very clearly realize the astronomical effort that it would take. But I also realize that a very large reason for why real help isn't sent is that entire nations profit from the current state, buying pig iron from Mbunto Mbembe the warlord turned president.

Don't fuck the Amazon.
The amount of biodiversity in it is astonishing and shouldn't just be thrown away for a misguided idea of progress.
We have a lot of medical advance that came from studying the herbs and plants there and what substances they produce, turning it into arable land would be a huge loss to future pharmaceltical endeavors.

>I was under the impression that since some international concert would be funding it, an international concert would also be making sure that it goes into the right hands.
Then the international concert could just better manage the food surplus we already have.

Tribalism is what allows us to sacrifice personal desires and wealth for the good of our people, but it only works when you can actually relate to your people on a cultural, religious, or racial level. A world where everyone is about "humanity" is a world where everyone is only out for themselves.

Please give me a single article, link, hell, even quote by someone in any government this century who has expressed that it is better to trade with a destabalized country than a long term reliable trade partner.

I can't believe you are so basic and simple.
You just have humanity as your tribe, relate to humanity's collective accomplishments, culture, glory of our species, etc.
Everything you wrote about "tribe" can be also felt about "civilization", the collective human community.
The point is that it isn't felt at the moment, and instead of cooperating we compete, and thus instead of helping we exploit. Thus Africa.

You asked for the cure, and now you are complaining it tastes sour.

>Everything you wrote about "tribe" can be also felt about "civilization", the collective human community.
Really? How the fuck am I supposed to be willing to sacrifice for muslims when all I hear about is how they're killing my Christian brothers and sisters? How am I supposed to relate to North Koreans when their sense of liberty and justice is so far from the American ideal?

Ok user, and what laws will humanity as a whole agree to.

Yeah and an educated black person with knowledge of how to utilize the land will use it better than a retarded and uneducated white person.

Your point weeb poster?

99% of laws are common sense and shared among the majority of people alive.
Of course we pick the more successful versions, practiced by the more successful states. They must be doing something right.

And anyway, you are arguing implementation, as if a Veeky Forums post will solve that.
I am stating the principle. I am the physicist telling you how it works, consult your local architect/engineer to build you the thing.

As stated, you are simple and basic. When people more sophisticated than you decide its time to actually solve shit, you will convert easily.

There's not a whole lot of educated non-retarded white people in Africa, what with all the disease and warlords and poverty and malnutrition. Until the place is properly developed you can't just send them raw materials and expect them to build a civilization from it.

>There's not a whole lot of educated non-retarded white people in Africa
I wonder who's to blame for that.

>I care more about pretty birds than people

National Security Study Memorandum 200, President Ford, Kissinger, who knows how many presidents have unofficially taken it to heart. Paraphrased here.
>If an industrialized Africa is permitted to exploit its own raw materials, this would not leave enough reserves of raw materials for the Anglo-Americans

>As stated, you are simple and basic. When people more sophisticated than you decide its time to actually solve shit, you will convert easily.
"Sophisticated" people have been in charge of Europe for a while now, and all it's done is drive the divisions between humanity further and further apart.

So?

Africans?

Mate, your hardware isn't sufficient to run this software. You lack drivers too.
You will be updated when its suitable and useful.

>99% of laws are common sense and shared among the majority of people alive.
I guess that's why laws are constantly being made, overturned, amended on every single level from municipal to federal, and that's just in one country. You are woefully misinformed about the legislative process if you beleive "99% of laws are common sense"

>I'm going to drive hundreds of endemic species to extinctions just so that we can overpopulate this planet even more

You don't have an argument anymore, do you?

Investment is more valuable than Charity. Nobody wants to invest in such an unstable shithole. Why try and set up a business when a warlord could drive by and kill your employees?

I will never ever understand this reasoning. Who cares? You seriously value the tan-cheeked gerbil over the development and standard of living of an entire nation?

>Paraphrased
Please link the direct quote if you can name where it's from

more arable land =/= higher development and standard of living for an entire nation

retardo

>Both arguments are either heartless or too emotional and I'm going to ignore them. Name ONE way geo-engineering 3rd world biomes are bad. "lolniggers" isn't a valid argument either.

Name a major event in history that wasnt instigated by heartless and selfish thoughts. While your thinking about that ill live the rest of my life without ever getting a good response because at the end of every major undertaking or historical event there is a bunch of assholes that decided to do a bunch of shit to make money or gain power.

If you want Africa to become some kind of geo engineered paradise make it profitable to do so. Until there is money in it or people with money are interested in it it wont happen.

I just find it unreasonably anthropocentric to not care at all about the existence of several unique species just for the possibility of making a part of the continent more hospitable for humans.

>Who cares? You seriously value the tan-cheeked gerbil over the development and standard of living of an entire nation?
Yes, when species are gone, they gone forever
Blacks on the other hand, need to decrease their population

National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests, 1974

Read up you stupid nigger.

Biodiversity is ultimately useless as long as the enviroment still supports human use.

Any humanitarian effort.

You are an absolute fucking idiot.

Why are STEMfags always complete brainlets when it comes to the law lmao?

Every single time it's always RAH I LE SPEAK FOR LE COLLECTIVE HUMANITY JUST LIKE RICHARD STALLMAN TOLD ME!!!

common laws lol

common laws rotflmao

At least Africa is getting one thing right

common sense roflcopter

You say that because you don't live in that shit and yo already live in a fucking state of civility and modernity you entitled guy. Who are you to say that people are happy living as poor fucks years behind the times with no money and "one with nature" (which is a complete meme).

>We have a lot of medical advance that came from studying the herbs and plants there and what substances they produce, turning it into arable land would be a huge loss to future pharmaceltical endeavor

And the locals get absolutely nothing. Indigenous and semi-indigenous knowledge has always been taken and exploited and for financial gain with the people receiving nothing in return for it. If pharmaceutical knowledge.

Does anyone in this thread even know how the desert belts work?

Yes, of course. Do you know how deserts expand?

Niggers.

Nice meme. I see shitloads of green on the "desert belt" and shitloads of yellow above and below it. You do realise the Sahara was once a lush region, right?

and now it isn't

Those are common sense. They are common sense wrong. You are pointing at things the vast majority of people agree are wrong, and act as if there is a big debate over their merit.

>You are pointing at things the vast majority of people agree are wrong
>western nations
>vast majority of people

Go to Iran, walk to a random person on the street, start to cut their head off and crucify the corpse, and see if people cheer or stop you. Or China. Or Japan. Or Russia. Or India.

inb4 you move the goalpost so far that almost every country on the planet is now "the west".

Yeah because they just randomly did it without any pretext whatsoever. Holy shit you must have the IQ of a fence post.
Here's what would happen if Saudi Arabia accepted millions of Ukrainian refugees and then said Ukrainians decided to massacre saudis couple of times a week in a murder frenzy. A couple hundred would be executed and the rest deported.

Oh, you moved the goalpost into another conversation instead. Amazing.

You had no goalposts you goddamn retard. You just implied the guy got decapitated for literally no reason whatsoever.

You implied that by posting him randomly without description other than "rotflmao".
Give a reason and my point stands.

>he was beheaded and publicly crucified for being gay
Not acceptable to 90%+ of humans worldwide.
>he was beheaded and publicly crucified for being christian
Not acceptable to 99%+ of humans worldwide.

Speaking of China
>common values
>common sense
youtube.com/watch?v=XCjOrkcEvs4
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_infanticide_in_China
lol

Infanticide is illegal in China. I don't know what you are trying to play here.
The gender imbalance is about report rates, not about birth rates. A family can have 3 children (2 girls and 1 boy) and only report the boy, because of the 1 child policy.
There have been western conducted surveys like that, a village having a much larger population than on paper because of all the non reported women, and fully grown women being created from thin air when it comes time to marry and they need documents.

There is also sex-selective abortion, which obviously isn't infanticide, seeing how there is no infant.

It's illegal in most of the world in general yet you don't see the general population practice it in the west as much as in China do you? Anyway doesn't matter since at this point
You're trying to construct irrelevant semantics for the sake of winning the argument. What does it matter if the thing he got killed for won't get him killed in other nations? That was never the point and doesn't change the fact that different places will resort to violence, murder and savagery to preserve their natural order, whether it be people who renounce what is sacred or those that dare be born in the wrong gender. There's no "universally accepted code".

>people used to beat children
>make it illegal
>several generations later barely anyone beats children

Wow, its almost as if culture isn't stuck in the 18th century as some posters here would want.
I won't reply further, you have nothing but cherry picks. Work out, eat healthy, stay stress free, and you will see the world coming closer together, and when you die you can cry about the realization that yes, nationalities will be washed away, we are witnessing their stubborn final stand, and a human identity will replace the tribal one.

Yeah laws are the best form of moral aggregation lol
>I won't reply further
I don't blame you man, it must be hard when all you've got is vast amounts of ignorance and shitty non-arguments up your sleve.

International aid does more harm than it does good.
If Africa was still owned by European nations and the african (french/german/dutch/italian/english/etc) people would be treated like regular citizens, with their land being a core state/province and not just an occupied territory, you'd see industrialization in those third world countries leading to prosperity and good standards of living.

Of course, that's not and never was an option, but the former colonist states treat those new African Nations as former colonies and not as foreign powers. The granting of international aid is (generally) a corrupt process - all the money is pocketed by the local warlord instead of being spent on improving the country while the former colonist nation extracts all the valuable resources for laughably small prices. Not a lot of people talk about this, but it's been going on since the end of WW2 and there's no reason for the former colonist nations to stop, they're bettering their country by keeping African nations shit under the guise of a humanitarian act. In fact when African countries (Burkina Faso) try to stop the foreigners from plundering their land their leaders are branded as dictators and get assassinated, a lot of money is again being spent to try and put a corrupt leader back up that'l allow things to go as smoothly as before.

African countries shouldn't expect the first world to help them when the first world profits off of them more than it ever did. France won't benefit if their former colonies were rich and had an abundance of food because then they wouldn't need France's brib- I mean international aid. So why would they dump shitloads of money on land that's not even theirs? The only hope for the third world is to stop accepting help and to build their countries themselves, which, sadly enough, only happens under fanatical nationalist dictatorships that refuse foreign aid, and not under stable democracies.

isn't this just futurism?

>IN THE YEAR 3000 WE WILL ALL etc etc etc

that's not how tribalism works, nigga.
Maybe if aliens come to visit, but otherwise no.
You need an "other" to have a tribe.
>I care more about pretty birds than people
It's not birds.
It's about an entire ecosystem that supports half the planet.

they could if the Amerikkkans didn't kill Gaddafi

Tbf, the main instigators of that shitshow were the French. God forbid the French stop being so autistic about muh Franzafrique

Everyone! Let's use our magical 'desert-reversal' technology!

who let this kid use a computer?

retarded post

Just cut off food and general aid and let them figure their own shit out. There should be a total non-interference policy after all the colonialism shit that has transpired there over the past couple hundred years.

The only way Africa will develop is by the will of its own people, we need to trade with them like we did with every other civilization on Earth, not just hand them free shit, if they are treated on equal grounds as the rest of the people on Earth they will slowly but surely cultivate a civilization.

I know in Canada the worst thing we did to the natives was make them totally dependent on our aid, we deprived of them the means of self-sustenance after generations of handouts and now they are a crippled shell of their former selves. It would have been better in my opinion if they had rather remained in a state of war with us, at least they'd have died with dignity rather than become the husks they are now, because the natives of Canada are by all means spiritually destroyed, and all it took was economic handouts and the residential school system, two things we thought would help them ended up hurting them terribly in the end.

Geoengineering would be hard if the climate wasn't changing in a way that speeds up desertification.

As it is, we'll be lucky if the middle east isn't largely uninhabitable during summer without ir conditioning. Not in a meme way, in a literally cannot support human life way.

Considering massive parts of Africa are what is known as a 'green desert', this is a more pressing problem : one are aren't going to solve. Despite liberals desperate attempts to claim otherwise, climate change passed the unstoppable tipping point over 2 years go.

You're focusing on 'making things better' when we're in a triage situation. Soon Southern Europe and the SE united states will have a resurgence of malaria (It's already happening in Greece). Now that DDT is banned, making inroads against those mosquitos will be even harder than it was the first time.

Moreover, your geoengineering would just give the tsetse fly free rage to spread across even larger areas of Africa.
People don't think about this shit, but even today raising cttle in areas with tsetse flies requires prophylactic medicine to treat your cows. That medicine costs money. If you don't use it all the time, the cows get sick and die.

You might get sleeping sickness (also spread by tsetse flies) and never wake up.

Notice the northern range of the tsetse fly? Seems to end right about where the Sahara begins, doesn't it?

Forgot muh image. Whoops. I'm too tired for this shit.

>Nationalities will be washed away

>unless you think that breaking the Geneva convention is a smarter idea

I do. Fuck your refugees.

Interestingly enough Yoruba all have genetic mutation that provide them safety from Tsetse even though it no longer exists there.

Something related to green Sahara populations

This is good argument

>Yes, when species are gone, they gone forever
>Blacks on the other hand, need to decrease their population
I'm black, and I...Agree with this. A better QoL can't happen if there's too many lives to begin with...

I love the Imperial Guard, specially the Death Korps and I find it fucking disgusting you use them to avatarfag and spread your faggotry. Fucking kill yourself.

Alanthropa

>I didn't write anything about how to actually change biospheres, that's called science, and I'm not a scientist.

We can tell. The point is that geoengineering on that scale, other than being immensely impractical, would create massive problems elsewhere.

I doubt that.

>Having good land will make countries more stable
ethnic homogeneity makes them more stable. the closest thing to that in sub-saharan africa, botswana, is the most stable country on the continent, despite terrible poverty and an AIDS epidemic

>a white owning a patch of desert won't utilize it any better than a black
Yeah because Mauretania is so much better utilized than Arizona. Faggot.

>Rhodesia is a desert
Nigger education