Destruction
in sentence
1388 examples of Destruction in a sentence
Extreme balance-sheet
destruction
is what made it distinctive.
Man-made environmental change is caused by reckless land use, overgrazing, depletion and contamination of surface freshwater resources, overuse of groundwater, degradation of coastal ecosystems, inefficient or environmentally unsustainable irrigation practices, waste mismanagement, and the
destruction
of natural habitats.
The biggest difference of all between Moscow and New York came from the GDT statement “It is better to live in a society with strict order than to allow people so much freedom that they can bring
destruction
to the society.”
Moreover, while nuclear weapons pose a continuing danger, they also inhibit the risk of war as a means of power politics by making mutual
destruction
a certainty.
The DigitalGlobe satellite images of
destruction
are horrifyingly similar to what we have seen too many times in the past in Sudan.
There is no conceivable basis under the laws and customs of war for the deliberate razing of civilian homes and the theft or
destruction
of supplies provided by the generosity of other governments to help the population meet its urgent needs.
This new techno-market system is shaped and characterized by a belief in the increasing importance of knowledge, new ideas, innovations and new technologies, and a higher pace of what the economist Joseph Schumpeter famously called "creative destruction."
The Iraq war was ostensibly launched because of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, yet each passing day suggests that the threat was exaggerated.
This is certainly the case with the analogy that Israeli leaders insist on drawing between the
destruction
of European Jewry in the Holocaust and the threat posed to the Jewish state by a nuclear-armed Iran.
Even Defense Minister Ehud Barak, usually a coolly rational thinker, chose Yad Mordechai, a Kibbutz named after Mordechai Anilewitz, the leader of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, to alert world opinion against “Holocaust deniers, first and foremost the Iranian president, who calls for the
destruction
of the Jewish people.”
He would show them how the Jewish state, created by Holocaust survivors and now led by one, would come to the rescue of a Christian minority threatened with
destruction.
The economic consequences of such an outcome – owing to its impact on energy supplies and investment flows, in addition to the
destruction
of lives and physical capital – would be immense.
Moreover, to justify invading Iraq in 2003, the United States (and the United Kingdom) produced equally “conclusive” evidence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, which turned out to be false.
Indeed, the only obvious danger that the US faces stems from weapons of mass destruction, which could proliferate or be used by terrorist groups.
But, by effectively transforming the economic geography of China, Asia, and the world, liberalization would also lead to significant creative
destruction.
Some anti-Japanese demonstrations – which featured rioting, looting, and the
destruction
of Japanese businesses – mutated into anti-government protests.
Weapons of mass
destruction
could not be found, and the connection with al Qaeda could not be established.
If those in Italy’s government who advocate a departure from the eurozone get their way, the situation will become even more explosive, owing to widespread economic destabilization and the
destruction
of confidence.
So America is committed to what can only be called "conditional engagement" with the North as part of its global campaign against international terrorism and weapons of mass
destruction.
Morals and the MeltdownLONDON – After World War I, H.G. Wells wrote that a race was on between morality and
destruction.
H.G. Wells was only partly right: the race between morality and
destruction
encompasses not just war, but economic life as well.
"Don't extend the fight against terrorism to the producers of weapons of mass destruction!"
As long as countries hold on to these inhumane weapons of mass destruction, proliferation and nuclear threats will persist.
Bush and Blair talked repeatedly about stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, massive underground and mobile units to produce or launch such weapons, and active programs to obtain nuclear weapons.
Bush and Blair must show that any weapons of mass
destruction
that are recovered posed a grave and urgent threat.
There should also be an explanation, if weapons of mass
destruction
are uncovered at other sites, as to why the inspectors could not have found such weapons in a realistic period of time.
This will depend on an objective assessment of the costs of the war in terms of loss of life,
destruction
of property, economic impact within Iraq, spillovers into other forms of violence such as terrorism, and geopolitical consequences.
If compelling evidence proves that weapons of mass
destruction
were at hand; that they were poised for use on a threatening scale; that the UN inspectors had poor prospects of uncovering and dismantling those weapons, then we must acknowledge the arguments made by Bush and Blair.
As Iran scanned the strategic horizon, it seemed obvious that the US had invaded Iraq because Saddam did not have any weapons of mass
destruction.
Some of these characteristics are more culturally specific than Joseph Schumpeter’s description of entrepreneurship as a process of “creative destruction” might imply.
Back
Related words
Weapons
Which
Their
Would
World
Other
There
Nuclear
Creative
About
Could
Death
People
Economic
Against
Global
Assured
After
Should
Change