Try being informed, not just opinionated.

leoj
Do you have preferences for handling the issues of poverty ?

"Nuke disarmament is now the precondition for doing something". Wrong again leoj, Foxy is not saying that at all. She said that if nations were to resolve their belligerency towards each other, giving the proliferation of nuclear weapons as an example of that, then more resources could be directed towards solving the massive problems humanity is facing. Using Foxy's words "we (the world) can divert unprecedented energy and resources to the real problems that face us, including poverty, disease, overpopulation, injustice, oppression, and the devastation of our natural environment." Nothing from Foxy supports your assumption that there is some precondition that nuke disarmament has to take place first, before anything at all can be done. People of goodwill in the world are presently doing something about many of those problems, but more can be done, if more resources are available.
The world spends about $1.6 trillion annually on militarism, in my opinion a total waste of resources. If only a fraction of that expenditure was directed towards solving the real problems then it would make a mighty difference.
Leoj, people with your attitde are not the solution, but the cause of the problem.

Dear Paul,

Many countries spend more of their budgets for military
purposes than they do for education or medical care.
The international military establishment as we know -
employs millions of people. I remember reading that
the World military expenditures in the "International
Year of Peace," (ages ago - 1986) was a record $900
billion. Over the past quarter century, global spending
for military purposes has consumed spending in the trillions.
This represents a colossal diversion of funds
from socially useful goals: for example
a single hour's worth of expenditure -
according to the Washington Post would suffice to save through
immunization, hundreds of thousands of children around the
world who die each day from preventable infectious diseases.

Over the centuries, warfare has shaped and disrupted
societies, altered the course of history, and led to the
slaughter of hundreds of millions of people, combatants and
non-combatants alike.

Anyway, Thank You for understanding what I was trying to say.

Is mise
If Jesus was in Judea today. The Islamic fundamentalists would probably kill him.

Foxy
< If ways are found to reverse that process,(nuclear weapons) then we can divert
unprecedented energy and resources to the real problems that
face us, including poverty, disease, overpopulation, injustice,
oppression, and the devastation of our natural environment.>

Nations could have directed billions in aid toward providing women with the means to control
their own fertility, the male leaders and religions in these poverty stricken overpopulated countries
who dominate the United Nations wouldn’t and won’t allow this.

At the same time they think they can push all the big populations caused by this,
into Europe and Western countries whilst being in total denial they caused the problem in the first place.
The overpopulation causes much more environmental damage than Western nations.
India and China burning much more coal for power than western countries.
I read somewhere recently that one of those two, I forget which, is all set to build another 800coal power stations.

Then in very poor areas where they don’t even have coal, they use all the trees for cooking, and drive the animals to extinction with their ever expanding populations.

All the problems you list, are the result of male dominated religions, and oppression of women

I am tired of the Countries in the United Nations and around the world, laying all these problems
And blame on Western European countries. And expecting us to constantly pour the money of
the hard working Western people’s into problems not caused by us at all.
The finger and blame should be pointed, mostly at Muslim countries and their backward thinking
Religious leaders, who have held those countries back in the dark ages and have never allowed them to
Advance and prosper. Now they think that countries who didn’t hold people back with blasphemy laws to kill
any who dared to raise new ideas that may have threatened the power of the imams should be given over to them.

Is it time to "accept all" in a move towards improved communities.

And just how are you going to get into the minds of all individuals and make them
"accept all"

This is where these nice sounding ideas break down. Nobody has control over the way people's mind are and what they believe and how they will act.

And what if you try your hardest to accept an ethnic group, but they don't accept you.
What if they send their kids to segregated religious schools where they never have to mix and accept other people in the community.
When those kids come home, they come home to only those people who live in their own big enclaves and grow up there under different religious laws to the rest of the community.

Im sorry, but it makes the topic for discussion here, impossible to achieve, and a form of
thinking this kind of acceptance can be forced and taught to people, when none of us can control the minds of others or their willingness to accept other groups.
The same human behaviour that has been in play for thousands of years is still the same as it always was.