Game of Words: View vs. Counter View 1.35

THE BASHAR AL ASSAD GOVERNMENT

              

VIEW

Hriday Patel

1 BBA ‘D’

Born on September 11, 1965, Bashar Al-Assad had no intention of entering political life, let alone becoming president of Syria. But a tragic death and a calculating father saw to it that he would. Though promising to be a transformational figure that would propel Syria into the 21st century, Al-Assad has instead followed in the footsteps of his father, leading to demands for reform and the launch of a deadly civil war. After this, Bashar al-Assad has been a major cause of mass killings and denial of human rights to his own people.

The above paragraph is the lie that the western media has spread to form a negative mass opinion about the very able and strong headed President of the Syrian Arab Republic, Mr. Bashar al-Assad. I have a few facts to support my argument. Some of them being, when Bashar took the reins of the government, Syria's economy was in terrible shape. Lost were the decades of support from the Soviet Union after its collapse in 1991. A serious recession in the mid-1990s was exacerbated by Syria squandering its oil revenues on its second-rate army. However, by 2001, Syria was showed many of the signs of a modern society—cell phones, satellite television, trendy restaurants and Internet cafes. Bashar al-Assad won Syria’s first multi-candidate democratic election in July 2014. No leader can win such an election if he is not loved and looked up to by his people. Bashar took office when Syria was at its worst, after his father Hafez al-Assad, who had taken Syria from bad to worse. Bashar al-Assad brought a lot of changes in policy and governance which led to the ultimate upliftment of the Syrian economy and nation as a whole.

To sum up, all that I would like to say is, Bashar al-Assad’s story of governance is an accurate example of the lies that are feeding general opinion both by the media and by the “powerful” nations.

                                

COUNTER VIEW

Pranav Suneil Menon

1 BBA ‘D’

Some men are born evil, some achieve evil, and some have evil thrust upon them. Bashar al-Assad of Syria falls into the third category; but from the point of view of his victims, it hardly matters. For them, evil is evil and death is death. The psychological origins of a man’s crimes don’t make them less real or horrible to those who suffer from them.

Bashar al-Assad was considered a younger-generation Arab leader, who would bring change to Syria, a region long filled with aging dictators. He was well-educated, and many believed he would be capable of transforming his father's iron-rule regime into a modern state. Influenced by his western education and urban upbringing, Bashar initially seemed eager to implement a cultural revolution in Syria. He stated early on that democracy was "a tool to a better life," though he added that democracy couldn't be rushed in Syria. In his first year as president, he promised to reform the corruption in the government, and spoke of moving Syria toward the computer technology, internet and cell phones of the 21st century.

Like any type-cast leader, he promised a great deal of improvements and change but unlike other leaders who don’t fulfill their promises, Bashar al-Assad caused even bigger problems over the problems which Syria was already facing. In 2006, Syria expanded its use of travel bans against dissidents, preventing many from entering or leaving the country.

In 2007, the Syrian Parliament passed a law requiring all comments on chat forums to be posted publicly. In 2008, and again in 2011, social media sites such as YouTube and Facebook were blocked.

Human rights groups have reported that political opponents of Bashar al-Assad are routinely tortured, imprisoned and killed so the people of Syria live under a false veil of democracy. In January 2012, the Reuters News Agency reported that more than 5,000 civilians had been killed by the Syrian militia (Shabeeha), and that 1,000 people had been killed by anti-regime forces which was the start of a failed coup. All of these horrendous and graphic violence could have been averted had he been the leader he promised he was.

In August 2013, al-Assad came under fire from leaders around the world, including U.S. president Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron, for using chemical weapons against civilians, but he managed to remain unscathed due to a strong strategic partnership he solidified with Russia and due to this, they came to Syria’s aid.

For the lack of depth, I have mentioned only his well-known discrepancies when it comes to leading his country but if I had to, the list could go on for longer. It is for these reasons which I have mentioned above and many more unnoticed crimes that I strongly believe that the Bashar al-Assad government is a governance style which should never be emulated or implemented anywhere else.

Game of Words: View vs. Counter View 1.34

Does a country require complete disarmament of their nuclear weapons?

View

    - By Benson

Yes, complete disarmament of nuclear weapons is very much required. Just think about all the efforts put by the scientists and the amount of money spent on this; which is meant for nothing but DESTRUCTION.

Nuclear power can be used to produce energy, that can one day run the whole world.

We all know the after effects of a nuclear blast; killing millions of people, making the environment bare and unusable and even mutating the upcoming generations. If World War 3 was to break out, we are all doomed for sure.

       

There are 196 countries in this world and only 9 among these have nuclear weaponry. So, let us take a minute to think about the plight of the other 185 countries, who do not have this "Nuclear Weaponry" and how submissive they are when compared to the other 9 countries. The urge to acquire this becomes inevitable and thus, leads to more chaos and destruction.

       

Why to use nuclear energy for destruction, when you can use it for the betterment of our lives. Hence, complete disarmament of nuclear weapons is necessary.

Counter-view

    - By Nikhil John

 Every Country in the world has to have certain power, without power a country cannot survive in this era. It’s not necessary that a country should attack another country to show it's strength or power and the resources to trigger the fear statement in another country. At times of extreme crisis it's a necessity that a country has certain Nuclear power.

Even though the Hiroshima Nagasaki event was an extreme tragedy, it did trigger the fear factor in Japan. Enabling America to be highlighted as a powerful Nation. Like said it's never necessary to bomb a place to show the nation's strength but having the power is always better.

Eventually looking at the current situation ,if another world war breaks out it's better to have certain power to be on the safer side.

Currently, every country around the globe is being ranked according to their resources. This doesn't mean that a country can start testing the bombs on certain areas which is completely banned. Also a country should have certain Nuclear power but only to a little extent as it does affect the country's strength.

Hence it's better if a Country has certain Nuclear power.

Game of Words: View vs. Counter View 1.33

ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS

VIEW: AAYUSH BELLIAPPA

Entrance exams are essential towards the admission of a candidate to any institution or organization. The organization knows what it wants from the people under it and thus tests interested candidates on their eligibility.

Along with this, entrance tests are extremely helpful at screening candidates; it allows a simple and effective assessment so as to pick the right person.

Entrance tests also are a chance at redemption if candidates have previously scored low in other assessments. An entrance test however is not a sure method of selection but has been proven to be the most efficient and fairest form of selection. It gives everyone a chance to showcase their knowledge and levels the playing field as well as brings about a scope for new and promising talent.

Entrance exams have proven to bring about the most sincere and capable candidates, as they are quite stressful and require an amount of effort.

An added benefit is a feeling of self-confidence to those that clear such exams and rightly deserved. It also ensures a level of security to the selected bunch.

In conclusion, it is fair, efficient and eliminates the chance of giving excuses. Just like try outs are necessary for cultural and sport teams. Entrances are necessary to ensure quality.

COUNTERVIEW: MEDHA PRASAD

           Entrance exams have been a traditional way of selecting candidates for colleges. They are efficient and systematic and make the whole procedure easier on the whole. Nowadays, almost all institutions and universities in India have their own entrance tests to check whether a student is qualified enough to gain a seat, they have various parts that cover certain subjects to certain extents and the knowledge of the candidate about these matters is what is taken under consideration.

          In simple words, an entrance exam is simply the procedure in which a student answers the given set of questions which are usually multiple choice based and if they make the required cut off and get sufficient answers right, they’re in. If they fail to do so then they simply do not get a chance. Personally, I think that this is a very unfair procedure to select worthy candidates. There are multiple students that have all the criteria required to be an all rounder or excel in a certain field but because they can’t clear a certain test, they may never get the opportunity to do so and will not be provided with the best kind of education or knowledge preferred by him.

            Besides this, it’s such an odd method to test someone on the very same subject that they want to join the college to learn about. Why ask people questions that they themselves are out here seeking the answers to? Nowadays, Quantitative Aptitude has become a basic necessity, people that want to pursue a course in design are still made to write tests on Quantitative Aptitude and other topics such as General Knowledge which makes no sense as how is this ever going to judge their creativity? And only if they clear this very first round do they get to show their actual artistic skills and this will always be beyond my understanding.

            Even though, entrance exams have their own benefits and make the seeding procedure much easier, it isn’t the most suitable way to be judging the students’ abilities to its fullest and in the best way. If this system must stay, I believe it should be highly modified in such a way that It tests candidates for only the required minimum abilities and questions that are related to the course in anyway. In this way it will not only be fair but completely suitable students may be obtained and even the level of their abilities can be assessed at its best.

Game of Words: View vs. Counter View 1.32

INTERNET OF THINGS: POSSIBILITIES & THREATS

The Internet of Things (IoT) is a system which connects all the devices to the internet and then to each other to facilitate the flow of information which would lead to automation of activities or minimising human involvement.

VIEW (POSSIBILITIES)

- By Maria Manjooran

The possibilities of IoT could be classified in the following ways;

Personal Automation: Home automation becomes a reality when all the devices at home are connected to the internet and works as and when it is required. This eases the busy life of the man today in terms of time, money and effort. The day to day activities could be carried out more efficiently, according to the schedules. This also helps man to perform multiple activities at a time.

Industrial Automation: IoT will pave way for a new industrial revolution. When the machines are connected to each other, they can fulfill the needs without or with minimal human intervention. This eliminated the cost of labour to a great extent. The manufacturer himself can control the production in the absence of workforce and take informed decisions regarding the inventory. This is very effective in the case of the dynamic business situations. Services could be offered more conveniently and quickly when connected to this system.

Smart Cities: Since the urban population is rapidly increasing and becoming unmanageable, the possibilities of IoT can be applied to make the cities ‘Smart-Cities’. All the problems faced by urban dwellers, from pollution to waste management, can be solved based on the alerts and information provided by the devices which are connected to the internet. This can also ensure the equitable distribution of resources like water. Monitoring traffic and parking can help in saving a lot of time and money and also reduces the CO2 emissions.

COUNTERVIEW

- By Techi Meshi

One machine can do the work of fifty ordinary men. No machine can do

the work of one extraordinary man. ~Elbert Hubbard

Kevin Ashton cofounder and executive director of the Auto-ID Center at MIT, was the first to mention the Internet of Things in a presentation he made to Procter & Gamble in 1999. Though this word was first used in 1999, the IOT has been in development since the birth of technology, specifically the birth of “The Internet”.

Ever since the start of the technological revolution, there has been this quiet yet very profound race to achieve this so-called future of ‘Artificial Intelligence’! We are all so focused on advancing and uniting the world through technology that we many times fail to see the downsides to things. Yes, technology and internet have made things a lot easier for us. Knowledge is now literally at our fingertips! But have they made us any better? Are we humans, as a race, truly moving towards a future where we will be better than our current self. Will we have better physical and mental capability than what we do now?

This debate is as old as internet itself! Pro-technologists will argue that the good outweighs the bad however, I believe that this concept of ‘The internet of things’ will only make matters worse! There is already speculation among scientists about the negative impacts of technology on the developing brains of adolescence. Shorter attention

spans, lack of skills needed of critical thinking, some even believe that we as a generation have become “cognitive offloaders”. And I only bring up these issues because IOT will only make matters worse!

The common drawbacks that IOT brings forward are privacy issues, data sovereignty and most underrated but crucial point, the loss of human jobs. But I think there is something else, more sinister and conniving, that we need to be worried about and that is

“Technology-dependence”

Many may believe that our life is becoming better as we become more and more “Technology-savvy” but I disagree. I think rather than being savvy we are becoming more “technology-Dependent”. Those are two very different words meaning two very different things but it is the truth!

Try and recall the last time you memorised a phone number? Can’t? Do not worry! You are not alone. It is the same for most of the people around you. Our brains are being wired differently now. It is being forced to adapt to the onslaught of information that technology brings to us daily.

Remember when the quote “practice makes perfect” used to apply to the brain? We now have no need to memorise and remember things since the internet is a click away and can provide us with all the knowledge we could ever need. The concept of IOT may make our lives a lot easier but it will not make us as human beings any better! Are we really going to forsake our own capabilities to rely on machines to do the thinking for us? Are we really prepared to accept a future where we willingly let machines dictate our every move?

Game of Words: View vs. Counter View 1.31

HOME SCHOOLING :  A BANE OR A BOON?

VIEW

- Samantha Sandeep Daniel - 1 BBA ' A

Home Schooling movement  began growing in the 1970's mainly in the US and other countries .These homeschooled kids specialise in particular art form with a creative edge useful in different kinds of circumstances. I know of a couple with two kids who have moved to India from the US, who take the time to home-school their kids. They have a massive space in an incredible layout that has inbuilt part, swimming pool and sports ground.  I feel that kind of atmosphere is perfect for grasping knowledge.

The possibility of creating flexible schedules of tutoring helps the parents to create customisable curriculum. Even though flexibility allows freedom in terms of timings and location, they are trained to follow a relatively orderly routine which helps them later in life. Collaborative learning is sought as both parents and children learn new concepts by forming practical connections with the real world. The hourglass is favourable to the home-schooled child, who ends up saving time which is otherwise lost in daily commute or incessant traffic.

Also, classroom management takes a toll on time preservation as the teacher spends most of the time trying to maintain discipline etc. The foundational principle known to all parents engaged in home schooling, is the knowledge that each child requires specialised education. Individualised education syllabus can be tailor made to suit the child’s needs and interest. Since the student to teacher ratio drastically reduces, there is a tendency of delivering better quality education.

The endless school supplies and avoid different fundraising commitments and burdens. Regular schools have the stunted system of standardised testing, prevalent throughout its levels. While homeschoolers can be graded and tested on personalised tests created from their respective syllabus. They can also be offered wholesome schooling in different spectrums of learning such as pursuing art, music, sports, dance culinary skills etc.

Here learning is not just restricted to the four walls of the classroom but taken into the abodes of where great exposure lie. They can choose to impart hands on learning experiences, go on educative field trips and explore the world that breathes beyond the pages of a book. They are protected from the fear of inadequacy, punishments, institutional policies, detention or suspension that negatively affects a child’s confidence. They can thrive in an environment of liberty of thought and actions where they are allowed to be completely explorative.

COUNTER- VIEW

- Rachel Sasha Kenton - 1 BBA ' A

Homeschooling has more disadvantages than advantages. The reason as to why I'm convinced about this is that man is a social being and therefore he needs society besides family to have an all round development.

Homeschooling will not enable the child to interact with people other than his own family thereby inculcating in him an aloof nature and in many cases an anti social being.

A child who is homeschooled, in many cases grow up to be an individual who may or may not have the confidence and the self esteem to mingle in social situations .

The child is denied the companionship of peers and is surrounded by adults and therefore loses his child like nature at a very young age.

Most home school children behave like adults and are very withdrawn in giving their opinions, exposing their in-built talents and lack expressions of self.

A homeschooled child in most cases again, loses the ability to enjoy life in accordance with his age, which eventually ends up with these children growing up, building walls around themselves thus making them isolated from society.

Though most of them are successful as individuals, they are not so when asked to join corporate. A homeschooled child will not  receive all round development that is inculcated in regular schooling.

In conclusion, the fact must be stressed that a child rather attend regular school and enjoy their youth with their peers, growing up amidst the fun and laughter that naturally bubbles forth by being in the company of his peers.

Game of Words: View vs. Counter View 1.30

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

VIEW: NIKHIL DEV

 The justice system basically attempts to mete out punishment that fits the crime, and as such, severe crimes result in harsh imprisonment. The crime of “petty larceny” is not treated with the same severity that is meted to “grand theft auto,” and the latter, consequently, receives more time in prison.  So if severe—but non-lethal—violence toward another is found deserving of life without parole, then why should premeditated homicide be given the exact same punishment?  This fact might induce a potential criminal to go ahead and kill the victim he has already mugged and crippled.  Why would it matter?  After all, his sentence could not possibly get any worse.

If murder is the willful deprivation of a victim’s right to life, then the justice system’s willful deprivation of the criminal’s right to the same is—even if overly severe—a punishment which fits the most severe crime that can be committed.  Without capital punishment, it could be argued that the justice system makes no provision in response to the crime of murder, and thus provides no justice for the victim.    

COUNTERVIEW: JOSHUA AVINASH

Most prisoners consider each other to be in the same predicament, and treat each other quite well in general.  But they are still in prison, and despair about their lack of freedom.  What is life like for Zacarias Moussaoui, a member of the September 11 hijacking teams who got caught a month before the attack?  A single juror saved him from death.  He has, since 2006, been imprisoned for twenty-three hours per day in a tiny concrete cell, with one hour of daily exercise in an empty concrete swimming pool. He has no access to other inmates, and only rare contact with guards, who say nothing to him. He can see nothing of the outside world except a tiny sliver of sky—and this will be his life. Hence, capital punishment is an unnecessary threat.          

 Consider a pedophile that kills an infant girl by raping her.  There is an unwritten “code of honor” in prisons that virtually requires inmates to kill such offenders.  Probably half of America’s prisoners were in some way abused as children, and harbor a strong hatred for child abusers.  The murdering pedophile is given the death penalty, but will probably also spend ten years in prison prior to this.  He will most likely be kept in solitary confinement for his own protection, but there are some loopholes in such protection, and the inmates may find their way to him. And if this happens, the pedophiles are often gang-raped, castrated, beaten to death, stabbed, and sometimes even beheaded before guards can save them.    

Game of Words: View vs. Counter View 1.29

LEARNING THROUGH TECHNOLOGY?

View

- Ammar Quraishi M

Technology can be used to improve teaching and learning in a huge way. Technology can assist or in fact lesser the burden on teachers. Instead of the teacher being the only source of help in a classroom, students can access web sites, online tutorials, and more to assist them. Education doesn’t stop at the end of the school day because students have access to teachers, resources, and assignments via the web and access these resources at any time. Students can also get help and tutoring at any time, whether from the teacher via email or online collaboration, or from a help web site. It will also help students in creating a better future because they will be exposed to the digital world at an early period.

Integrating technology in education everyday helps students stay engaged. Today’s students love technology so they are interested in learning because they are using the tools they love.  Student can have access to digital textbooks which are constantly updated and often more helpful, creative, and a lot cheaper than those old heavy books. The students do not have to carry books in heavy bags so they are relaxed and it does not tire their body.

Students prefer technology because they believe that it makes learning more interesting and fun. They especially like laptops and tablets. Subjects that students feel challenging or boring can become more interesting with virtual lessons, through a video, or when using a tablet. Tablet can be linked to computers, projectors and the cloud so that students and instructors can communicate through text, drawings and diagrams. 

Thus, technology acts as a medium in understanding and learning.

Counter View
- Harsh Kumar

Technology cannot be used in the learning sector because it makes the students lazy as they sit in front of their laptops or tablets and learn, it  makes them effortless as they do not find any interest in going to the library and referring new books as they easily find the information in the internet, are unapproachable to teachers as they learn everything in the internet some of them without understanding the meaning of the particular topic, it also damage their eyes and may be infected with eye diseases such as glaucoma as they strain their eyes continuously watching their laptops or tablets.

Technology changes the way children think it alters the actual writing of the brain. The time spent with technology doesn’t just give kids new ways of doing things, it changes the way their brains work. The entertainment of mobile devices distracts nearly every student in the classroom whether texting, playing games, or surfing the net. While the students write a particular topic in their notebooks using pen or pencil makes them to understand the particular topic in an effective way which is not provided by the technology sector.

Using of technology also affects the physical strength of the students as they indulge in their laptops or tablets during their activity period in school and colleges. It also affects the relationship between the students as they do not socialize with each other and try to be alone every time. Technology can foster more cheating in class and on assignments. Learning through technology can also can put down the quality of research and sources the students find may not be at its best. Many students cannot afford technological learning as it is costly.

Thus, technological learning can be used to a certain extent only.

Game of Words: View vs. Counter View 1.28

Vegetarianism - a way of life.



VIEW

- Aparna Shastry, 1 BBA B

If the age old saying goes “You are what you eat” then I honestly don’t think the eternity of mankind is looking too good. Why do I say this? It’s because since the beginning of humanity, the only food man knew to sustain was meat, from caveman period through colonialism and now the modern man. But now, with all the endless options of fruit, vegetables, nuts, etc, why do we still eat animals?

Here are some reasons why vegetarianism should be the new lifestyle choice for us:

1.    Sparing Animals: This is arguably the most popular reason to convert, but yes, PETA will tell you that pardoning the lives of innocent animals is a true battle of conscience for most. But a common question I get is “If we stop being non-vegetarians, won’t the Earth be overrun with livestock?” It is a futile and ignorant thought, since the only reason we now have livestock in such large numbers is because we breed them as such to support the meat industry. If you stop breeding and raising them, their numbers will reduce to a normal, non-endangered, animal’s population size. Imagine if the roles were reversed. You were the helpless human, fed to be so obese you couldn’t even stand up, surrounded by other equally obese and helpless humans living for weeks in your own excrement, only to be put under a cleaver, processed and then stuffed in a sandwich. Doesn’t sound like much of a life, does it? Being at the top of the food chain, we are capable of pain, fear, sadness, excitement, joy and a range of other emotions. They feel it just as we do. And if we truly had emotions too, we’d understand that taking another life at the monetary gain of another is just plain apathy.

2.    Sparing the Environment: To most, this is a pointless argument, as one would say that reducing the number of cars on the road or segregating and recycling garbage would have a larger impact on our ecosystem. But again, you’d be wrong. Livestock production accounts for 15% of global greenhouse gas emission. That’s more than all the world’s automobile emission combined! In addition to this, livestock farms require thousands of litres of pure drinking water and tens of thousands of acres of useful farmland and luscious green forests. Compare this to the meagre amounts of water that cereals, fruits and vegetables consume and you have yourself a real wastage of natural resources. Thus, leading a vegetarian lifestyle would reduce your carbon footprint by 50-54% (compared to meat-eaters) make a gigantic impact on climate change.

3.    Sparing Your Body: Agreed, meat contains a high amount of protein; something most meat-eaters use to justify their preference for meat. Nut legumes, nuts, pulses and other plant-based foods have more than enough protein to lead a healthy and fit life. Researchers have also found that vegetarians have lower blood pressure and BMI (Body Mass Index) as well as LDL (bad) cholesterol in their bodies which in turn leads to their longevity and reduces their risk of contracting chronic diseases (according to Harvard Health Publications). Your risk of developing diabetes, obesity and even cancer reduce significantly if on a vegetarian diet. It has also been scientifically proven that a vegetarian lifestyle can help in solving acne-related problems and other skin diseases. Hence, just a simple removal of meat from one’s diet can keep the planet as well as your body happy and healthy.  

COUNTER-VIEW

- Mikhail, 1 BBA B

In a world where non vegetarians are put under pressure by vegetarians due to the dietary lifestyle they lead, here is my counter. Being a vegetarian or a non-vegetarian or a vegan is  a choice and everyone has the right to follow whatever they choose. The problems with vegetarians and vegans is that they like to condemn non-vegetarian lifestyles which is uncalled for. The choice to be a vegetarian may be due to religious reasons or just a person’s preference. In my counter-view, I won’t get into the topic of religion as it is too complex and controversial.

I would like to first start with the topic of health. Vegetarians like to say that they are healthier due to their diet but the fact of the matter is that a well balanced omnivorous diet trumps any vegetarian diet in all aspects. It has been noted that vegetarians are at the risk of becoming dangerously anemic due to them not getting enough vitamin D, B12 and iron. They are also unable to get sufficient amounts of Omega 3 fatty acids which is crucial for one to lead a healthy lifestyle. In research carried out by Sydney’s Garvan Institute of medical research, it was found that vegetarians had 5% less dense bones then that of non-vegetarians.

The next point I would like to make, revolves around the moral that vegetarians always try to put out to the world, that we should not kill God’s living creatures. This moral of theirs is laced with hypocrisy as plants are also God’s creature that do respond to stimuli like light and touch. Some people also believe that plants feel pain. In addition to this point, wherein vegetarians condemn the killing of living creature, I would like to ask them if they are sure that they aren’t killing living creatures themselves. Most will say they don’t. I would like to bring out an example of a cockroach. Don’t we all tend to kill this little insect on the basis that it scares us or that it “grosses” us out? In this case, vegetarians are no better but a little worse than non-vegetarians due to their hypocrisy. In the end, a life is a life, no matter how small.

Finally I would move on to the topic of the environment. It has been argued many a times by vegetarians that the cultivation of meat is harmful to the environment. I would like to counter that argument with a statement, that the cultivation of fruits and vegetables is even more harmful. Cultivation of fruits and veggies requires the use of pesticides and insecticides to prevent “pests” from eating the crops. These pesticides and insecticides have dire implications on the environment. These chemicals can enter the soil and then is leached into the water supplies. This sort of contamination of resources can have major neurological effects on us humans and on animals alike. While on the topic of water supplies, cultivation requires huge amounts of it. This may result in water shortage and sometimes drought. Not to say that non-vegetarians don’t eat plants as well, but if this lifestyle was adopted by everyone, every one of the above affects would amplify tremendously!

Therefore I would like to conclude by saying that vegetarianism as a lifestyle has its draw backs as well and therefore is more viable on paper but not in reality. If everyone converted to this lifestyle, it would result in mass deforestation in order to get more land for cultivation, drought situations due to the overuse of water resources and massive chemical imbalances in human and animals due to heavy use of pesticides.