Military assessment of climate change

11 comments on “Military assessment of climate change ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Andre 1

   2 December 2016 at 12:56 pm

   “America’s military need to sit down and have a quiet word with their soon-to-be Commander in Chief.”

   They’ve probably tried. But he’s not bothering with intelligence briefings, and besides he’s told us he knows more than the generals anyway.
2. marty mars 2

   2 December 2016 at 1:30 pm

   The military assessment of climate change should, I say should, make a difference to the politicans but the die is cast methinks. – Much easier to just start shooting (pretty soon people forget why it started or they don’t care because they are trying not to be killed) and you never know – you may win – whatever that concept may mean to the pea brained instigators of these horrors.

   Climate change and war are particularly rambunctious bedfellows – we all lose when they start playing around together

   “Wave the magic wand and the problem goes away. Those pesky pollution laws, carbon caps and clean-power plans: swish them away and the golden age of blue-collar employment will return. This is Donald Trump’s promise, in his video message on Monday, in which the US president-elect claimed that unleashing coal and fracking would create “many millions of high-paid jobs”. He will tear down everything to make it come true.

   But it won’t come true. Even if we ripped the world to pieces in the search for full employment, leaving no mountain unturned, we would not find it. Instead, we would merely jeopardise the prosperity – and the lives – of people everywhere. However slavishly governments grovel to corporate Luddism, they will not bring the smog economy back.”

   “… Eventually the anger that cannot be assuaged through policy will be turned outwards, towards other nations. Faced with a choice between hard truths and easy lies, politicians and their supporters in the media will discover that foreign aggression is among the few options for political survival. I now believe that we will see war between the major powers within my lifetime. Which ones it will involve, and on what apparent cause, remains far from clear. But something that once seemed remote now looks probable.”

   George Monbiot – writing some wise words often.

   https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/23/donald-trump-climate-change-war
3. Infused 3

   2 December 2016 at 2:07 pm

   You’re lucky Hillary isn’t in power then. Syria etc is her doing.
   • Henry Filth 3.1

     2 December 2016 at 2:45 pm

     You do come up with the most dreadful tosh, you know.
4. Draco T Bastard 4

   2 December 2016 at 3:54 pm

   America’s military need to sit down and have a quiet word with their soon-to-be Commander in Chief.

   Have you considered what NZ will need to do about this? We really can’t support many more people here under the conditions that will prevail in a few decades.
5. Ad 5

   2 December 2016 at 4:53 pm

   I wish these military guys would stop overplaying their hand.
   They sound like they’re playing leftie buzzword bingo for their budgets.

   When was the last time war broke out over water itself?
   The Lagash-Umma dispute of 2450 to 2400 BC?

   Even in Israel/Jordan/Lebanon catchment, people have come to sensible – if tough – conclusions without rolling the tanks in. They’ve all certainly had other reasons to roll the tanks in, but people get mighty pragmatic mighty fast when it comes to security of supply of water.
   • AmaKiwi 5.1

     2 December 2016 at 5:54 pm

     @ Ad

     Recently released Israeli documents from the 1960’s show Israel’s strategic objectives in the June 1967, Six Day War were to secure the Jordan River for Israel’s exclusive use. That’s the real reason they took the Golan Heights and the West Bank.

     “When was the last time war broke out over water itself?” 1967, for sure.
   • Pat 5.2

     2 December 2016 at 6:52 pm

     “….but people get mighty pragmatic mighty fast when it comes to security of supply of water.”

     people get mighty pragmatic about securing water when its in short supply…by any means and to hell with anyone else, I believe you meant to say.
   • Macro 5.3

     2 December 2016 at 7:35 pm

     Syria?
     The exacerbated drought of 2004 caused grain shortages worldwide.
     Sudan?
     The continuing drought in the Sudan particularly in the South exacerbated by religious differences.
     https://www.yahoo.com/news/ethnic-cleansing-going-south-sudan-u-n-commission-145611514.html?ref=gs (Reported just 14 hours ago).
     If people do not have enough to eat they tend to want to blame someone.
6. AmaKiwi 6

   2 December 2016 at 6:31 pm

   “Climate Wars” by Gwynne Dyer (2008, ISBN 978-0-307-35583-6).

   I highly recommend this book. Dyer describes six high risk regions where water wars are likely. I was particularly taken by his scenario for India and Pakistan. Pakistan depends completely on rivers whose origins are glaciers in India. If India dams these rivers for their own use, Pakistan must fight or it will starve to death.

   I also know Chinese companies (i.e., the Chinese government) are building hydro dams in Laos less than 10 km north of where the Mekong flows south into Cambodia. The dams will dramatically curtail the seasonal flow patterns of the Mekong River, which is the vital artery of Cambodia’s farming and essential fresh water fishery. It will also curtail rice growing in the most productive rice growing region of Southeast Asia, Vietnam’s Mekong delta.

   For more than a decade the CIA has warned that climate change is the single greatest threat to America’s national security. I agree.
   • Draco T Bastard 6.1

     2 December 2016 at 7:47 pm

     For more than a decade the CIA has warned that climate change is the single greatest threat to America’s national security. I agree.

     And it’s true for the whole world.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS