Quote:
Originally Posted by lbtan
I ain't nuclear scientist and sure cannot provide you the technical ar scientific details. But i believe even if we are adviced to 'leave the area' (hopefully you are not allegic to the phrase) on PRECAUTIONARY ground, i will be more that happy to accept the advice. Precaution and prevention where and when is reasonable is always better than aftermath reaction to problem.
|
lol I kind of am allergic to the phrase actually hahaha, there's such a negative stigma associated with it in my mind now ><
I'm all for precaution but there's reason and a bigger picture to keep into account.
Could you imagine if everyone in Tokyo left there on grounds of precaution, and then a global economic collapse occurs as a result? If you think the Lehman shock was big, the effect of Tokyo stopping would cause far more misery and deaths than the original precaution was meant to avoid. There is a social and global/international responsibility held by Japan.
France, Germany, America and many other countries recalling their citizens, advising them to leave, etc, was done as callous reaction. The leading scientists of these very nations had given their prognosis on current conditions and the governments simply have to cover their asses. Hell if I had a kid living within 100km of Fukushima I probably would want her to leave! So I can empathize, but that's emotional, and unfounded.