[ Return ]
>> | No. 1428
1428
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/1999/sep/02/paulbrown |
>> | No. 1429
1429
Surely it's cheaper, easier, and far, far less dangerous just to drive over there and plant them in person. |
>> | No. 1430
1430
>>1429 |
>> | No. 1431
1431
This sounds retarded. What's the point? |
>> | No. 1432
1432
>>1431 |
>> | No. 1433
1433
>>1431 I agree where would they get these trees? And surely just leaving the land alone for 30 years would have largely the same effect? |
>> | No. 1434
1434
>>1433 |
>> | No. 1435
1435
>>1433 |
>> | No. 1436
1436
>>1434 |
>> | No. 1437
1437
>>1434 |
>> | No. 1438
1438
>>1434 |
>> | No. 1439
1439
>>1436 |
>> | No. 1440
1440
Disliking trees that are planted in rows seems redundant in this instance, as these are not precision bombers. |
>> | No. 1441
1441
I'm all for this. I wish that Britain was covered in forest again. |
>> | No. 1442
1442
>>1441 |
>> | No. 1443
1443
>>1442 |
>> | No. 1444
1444
>>1443 Foreign aid is fallacy. The money is always tied to something (contracts, agreements, resource rights). You are right about currying favour. We are currently in competition with China for all Africa's minerals. |
>> | No. 1445
1445
>>1444 |
>> | No. 1446
1446
>>1445 |
>> | No. 1447
1447
>>1445 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tied_aid |
>> | No. 1448
1448
>>1447 |
>> | No. 1449
1449
>>1447 |
[ Return ]
Delete Post [] Password |