"However - just as it may be folly to deny that there is global warming, it might be equally fallible to not believe in overpopulation(I have not yet formulated an independent opinion on the matter.) The causes of which and the solutions of course are controlled by the "minds who got us into this mess" and I think therein lies the issue(just like with the global warming issue)."
I do not deny global warming; I might have a different perspective on its cause; nor do I deny overpopulation, I'm merely exposing the reality; that Africa is NOT THE SOURCE OF THAT PROBLEM. When compared to China, India and the rest of the Far East; or for that matter the Populus Industrialized West; in terms of RESOURCE vs USERS of said RESOURCES; Africa is a veritable Garden of Eden, and was even more so before the prodigal son got his hands on it. Africa is really the Final Frontier as the Americas were exploited and essentially destroyed well before the exploitation of Mama Africa began; and it began with the exploitation of its HUMAN RESOURCE.
** Completely agree. I was speaking rhetorically when I said "it may be folly to deny that there is global warming, it might be equally fallible to not believe in overpopulation" - I know your position on global warming. And I also understand your point about industrialized societies bearing the burden or responsibility in terms of man-made climate change. I was calling out your statement "China, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, United Arab Emirates and India, all U.S. allies" as grouping them all in terms of US Allies(most especially China). In terms of economic development models though - all of these nations do follow the general western-driven economic/industrial theory - and hence it makes sense how they mutually reinforce one another as well as are at odds at times when it comes to competition or cooperation in the race for exploitation of resources.
"* According to the article, it looks like Heinburg's plan is to be on the right side of an ethnic independence struggle in the non-Muslim south(a secessionist movement from the Muslim north) and that the winning side will grant him access to the land where he can start his enterprise which will perhaps employ Israelis as partners. "As a "middle finger to the Muslim-led government in Khartoum" says the article."
And how is an Israeli 'middle finger' different from a U.S.? Were Israelis on the frontlines of Africa's longest Civil War? The time for choosing sides has long passed, the only role left is that of opportunist; and an opportunist is an opportunist, be he Israeli or Arab, both sons of Abraham, and both are architects of CHAOS.
** IIsrael is generally more allied with the US while the Islamic Sudanese government seems to be more strategically aligned with China - hence why the Sudanese conflict is at times an issue paraded in the public eye by the MSM. Proxy powers at war. On a macro-level I see your point . . . In general all imperialistic powers are exploiting the area for their benefit regardless of "side."
FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site may at times contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml