Jump to content
Tomak

Disad Impact Cards

Recommended Posts

Miller 2002 [John, “Our next manifest destiny”, National Review, July 15, http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_54/ai_87869078]

 

With the right mix of intellectual firepower and political muscle, the United States could achieve what Dolman calls "hegemonic control" of space. The goal would be to make the heavens safe for capitalism and science while also protecting the national security of the United States. "Only those spacecraft that provide advance notice of their mission and flight plan would be permitted in space," writes Dolman. Anything else would be shot down. That may sound like 21st-century imperialism, which, in essence, it would be. But is that so bad? Imagine that the United States currently maintained a battery of space-based lasers. India and Pakistan could inch toward nuclear war over Kashmir, only to be told that any attempt by either side to launch a missile would result in a boost-phase blast from outer space. Without taking sides, the United States would immediately defuse a tense situation and keep the skies above Bombay and Karachi free of mushroom clouds. Moreover, Israel would receive protection from Iran and Iraq, Taiwan from China, and Japan and South Korea from the mad dictator north of the DMZ. The United States would be covered as well, able not merely to deter aggression, but also to defend against it.

 

 

AFNews 2007 (southwest asian news report, 5-3-07, "space ops critical to air, ground, naval forces" accessed via google at 5-20-07 at http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/library/news/2007/space-070503-afpn01.htm)

With the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility spanning 6.5 million square miles and 27 countries, the high ground of space continues to be critical to coalition air, ground and naval forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The Space Coordinating Authority, Combined Forces Air Component Commander Lt. Gen. Gary North, relies on Col. Cary Chun, the director of Space Forces, or DIRSPACEFOR, at the Combined Air and Space Operations Center to ensure theater commanders' space support needs are met whenever and wherever possible. In April, DIRSPACEFOR officials report U.S. Air Force space professionals used space assets to fulfill 22 Space Support Requests, or SSRs, for Operation Enduring Freedom, delivering 246 separate and specific effects. Another 22 SSRs were serviced in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, delivering 217 separate and specific effects. Effects included surveillance, tracking and targeting; position, navigation and timing; communications, weather and intelligence, and planning support

 

 

DOLMAN 2K3 [Everett, “Space Power and US Hegemony: Maintaining a Liberal World order in the 21st Century”, School of Advances Airpower Studies, http://www.gwu.edu/~spi/spaceforum/Dolmanpaper%5B1%5D.pdf]

And so it would. Complete domination of space -would give the United States such an advantage on the terrestrial battlefield that no state could openly challenge it. Traditional war would be effectively over. An idealist vision would be secured by realist means. Strategic dominance of space would Further force the United States to maintain the industrial and technical capacity to keep it at the forefront of hegemony for the foreseeable future. Nontraditional war, especially terrorism, would not be over, but it could very well be mitigated. The current dominant use of space for military matters is in the areas of observation and monitoring. These are the tools of effective police organizations, and have already been adapted in counter-terrorism plans. The details would be worked out in time, but the strategy clearly has benefits for the United States and the world. The moral argument has many levels, and stems from both the high ground and modified sanctuary theses (accepted here) that the weaponization of space is inevitable. The operational level contradiction is quite simply that it is unconscionable to assign the military services the task of controlling space, and then deny the best means to do it. To the military, it is the equivalent of sending a soldier into combat without a rifle. At the strategic level it thwarts the gloomier predictions of the awful result of space weaponization by preempting the process. Most theorists who lament the coming inevitability of space militarization do so on some variation of the notion that once one state puts weapons into space, other states will rush to do the same, creating a space-weapons race that has no productive purpose and only a violent end. Other assumptions are generally along the line that conflict and bloody war must eventually reach the cosmos, and delaying or holding off that eventuality is the best we can hope for. By seizing the initiative and securing low-Earth orbit now, while the United States is unchallenged in space, both those assumptions are revealed as faulty. The ability to shoot down from space any attempt by another nation to place military assets in space - or to readily engage and destroy terrestrial ASAT capacity, makes the possibility of large scale space war and or military space races less likely, not more. Why would a state expend the effort to compete in space with a power that has the extraordinary advantage of holding securely the highest ground at the top of the gravity well? So long as the controlling state demonstrates a capacity and a will to use force to defend its position - in effect expending a small amount of violence as needed to prevent a greater conflagration in the future - the likelihood of either scenario seems remote. To be sure, if the United States were willing to deploy and use a military space force that maintained effective control of space, and did so in a way that was perceived as tough, non-arbitrary, and efficient, other states would quickly realize no need to develop space military forces. It would serve to discourage competing states from fielding opposing systems much in the same fashion that the Global Positioning System (GPS) succeeded in forestalling the fielding of rival navigation systems. In time, United States control of low-Earth orbit could be viewed as a global asset and a public good.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest svfrey

WATER WARS GO NUCLEAR

Weiner, Prof. Princeton, ‘90 The Next 100 Years p.270

 

If we do not destroy ourselves with the A-bomb and the H-bomb, then we may destroy ourselves with the C-bomb, the Change Bomb. And in a world as interlinked as ours, one explosion may lead to the other. Already in the Middle East, tram North Africa to the Persian Gulf and from the Nile to the Euphrates, tensions over dwindling water supplies and rising populations are reaching what many experts describe as a flashpoint A climate shift in that single battle-scarred nexus might trigger international tensions that will unleash some at the 60.000 nuclear warheads the world has stockpiled since Trinity.

 

WATER SHORTAGES IN AFRICA WILL SPARK NUCLEAR WAR

NASCA 2k6 (National Association for Scientific and Cultural Appreciation, “Water Shortages – Only A Matter of Time”, http://www.nasca.org.uk/Strange_relics_/water/water.html)

Water is one of the prime essentials for life as we know it. The plain fact is - no water, no life! This becomes all the more worrying when we realise that the worlds supply of drinkable water will soon diminish quite rapidly. In fact a recent report commissioned by the United Nations has emphasised that by the year 2025 at least 66% of the worlds population will be without an adequate water supply. As a disaster in the making water shortage ranks in the top category. Without water we are finished, and it is thus imperative that we protect the mechanism through which we derive our supply of this life giving fluid. Unfortunately the exact opposite is the case. We are doing incalculable damage to the planets capacity to generate water and this will have far ranging consequences for the not too distant future. The United Nations has warned that burning of fossil fuels is the prime cause of water shortage. While there may be other reasons such as increased solar activity it is clear that this is a situation over which we can exert a great deal of control. If not then the future will be very bleak indeed! Already the warning signs are there. The last year has seen devastating heatwaves in many parts of the world including the USA where the state of Texas experienced its worst drought on record. Elsewhere in the United States forest fires raged out of control, while other regions of the globe experienced drought conditions that were even more severe. Parts of Iran, Afgahnistan, China and other neighbouring countries experienced their worst droughts on record. These conditions also extended throughout many parts of Africa and it is clear that if circumstances remain unchanged we are facing a disaster of epic proportions. Moreover it will be one for which there is no easy answer. The spectre of a world water shortage evokes a truly frightening scenario. In fact the United Nations warns that disputes over water will become the prime source of conflict in the not too distant future. Where these shortages become ever more acute it could forseeably lead to the brink of nuclear conflict. On a lesser scale water, and the price of it, will acquire an importance somewhat like the current value placed on oil. The difference of course is that while oil is not vital for life, water most certainly is! It seems clear then that in future years countries rich in water will enjoy an importance that perhaps they do not have today. In these circumstances power shifts are inevitable, and this will undoubtedly create its own strife and tension. In the long term the implications do not look encouraging. It is a two edged sword. First the shortage of water, and then the increased stresses this will impose upon an already stressed world of politics. It means that answers need to be found immediately. Answers that will both ameliorate the damage to the environment, and also find new sources of water for future consumption. If not, and the problem is left unresolved there will eventually come the day when we shall find ourselves with a nightmare situation for which there will be no obvious answer.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AT: NYQUIST

 

NYQUIST ‘7

[Jeffrey R., Contributing Editor to WorldNetDaily and Expert of Geopolitics, August 3, Financial Sense, “How the Present Economic Order Will End.” http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/pastanalysis/2007/0803.html]

 

Chaos will come, whether we want it or not. Nobody can smooth all the wrinkles out of the world economy, and the reign of the dollar cannot last forever. America’s enemies abroad, and those whose envy leads them to an uncharitable assessment of the United States and its motives, will grasp at any opportunity to knock the dollar off its perch. This opportunity is sure to come, and it will probably come in the next few years. Globalization, led by the United States, will be reversed. The world is not destined to become a global village because man is a tribal animal. His trust of others, especially his trust of foreign peoples, is limited. Consequently, the U.S. economy will be shaken to its foundations, and the patterns of consumption known to Americans will finally prove unsustainable. The integration of the various national economies into a global economy is a utopian project, and those most invested in this project will be most hurt. The integration of country with country cannot advance beyond a certain phase. Globalization will be stopped by ethnic, national and religious antagonisms. James calls this process “the victory of Mars.” All previous globalization attempts in history, he explained, “almost always end with wars.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AIDS

The continued spread of AIDS through Sub-Saharan Africa risks human extinction

THE JAKARTA POSTMarch 6,2000

Although the UN and the Security Council cannot solve all African problems, the AIDS challenge is a fundamental one in that it threatens to wipe out man. The challenge is not one of a single continent alone because Africa cannot be quarantined. The trouble is that AIDS has no cure -- and thus even the West has stakes in the AIDS challenge. Once sub-Saharan Africa is wiped out, it shall not be long before another continent is on the brink of extinction. Sure as death, Africa's time has run out, signaling the beginning of the end of the black race and maybe the human race.

 

 

AIDS is one of the biggest security threats the world faces and the status quo is genocide by complacency.

Benatar and Fox 05[solomon R. Benatar, Department of Medicine and Bioethics Centre, University of Cape Town, Renée C. Fox Department of Sociology and Center for Bioethics, University of Pennsylvania “Meeting Threats to Global Health a call for American leadership” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 48.3]

Responding to the growing realization that the global apathy towards the unfolding tragedy of the HIV/AIDS pandemic in developing countries is a "crime against humanity," former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell set a positive example in expressing the view that HIV/AIDS "is a catastrophe far worse by orders of magnitude than any problem or crisis we have on the face of the earth now . . . a catastrophe worse than terrorism" (Hogg et al. 2002). If an expensive [End Page 355] war against terrorism that threatens the lives of many thousands can be justified in the minds of some, a war against diseases that threatens the lives of millions of people should receive much greater support. Stephen Lewis (2003), the U.N. Secretary General's special envoy for HIV/AIDS, has been exemplary in courageously accusing world governments who ignore starvation and HIV/AIDS in Africa of "mass murder by complacency," and in raising the question of whether future peacetime tribunals will hold such governments accountable for these forms of crimes against humanity.

 

AIDS destroying the social fabric of society.

Cincotta and Haddock 06 [Richard P. Cincotta and Sarah Haddock February 1, 2006 Family Planning in Sub-Saharan Africa: Reducing Risks in the Era of AIDS volume 1, issue 2 http://www.populationaction.org/Publications/Research_Commentaries/Family_Planning_in_Sub_Saharan_Africa/Summary.shtml]

Destroying the social fabric Ninety percent of HIV-associated fatalities occur among people of working age. Like no other disease, AIDS debilitates and kills people in their most productive years. People in these age groups have largely completed formal education, and most are building or maintaining a family. Thus, the costs to social investment and social cohesiveness can be devastating in the most seriously AIDS-affected societies. Projections suggest the disease’s most destructive period is still to come. Four trends induced by HIV/AIDS pose threats to civil stability: 1) extremely high proportions of young adults; 2) the loss of trained teachers, technicians and professionals; 3) the weakening of police units and the undermining of military readiness; and4) the staggering number of orphaned children.

Death toll in Africa will keep rising due to AIDS

AVERT, 2005 [Avert.org, HOW MANY PEOPLE IN AFRICA: ARE INFECTED WITH HIV?, December 2005, http://www.avert.org/aafrica.htm (PDAF0126)]

The extent of the epidemic is only now becoming clear in many African countries, as increasing numbers of people with HIV are now becoming ill. In the absence of massively expanded prevention, treatment and care efforts, the AIDS death toll on the continent is expected to continue rising before peaking around the end of the decade. This means that the worst of the epidemic's impact on these societies will be felt in the course of the next ten years and beyond. Its social and economic consequences are already being felt widely not only in health but in education, industry, agriculture, transport, human resources and the economy in general.

 

There are 4 to 5 million HIV/AIDS infections every year

WAAL, 03[Alex de Waal, Commission for HIV/AIDS Governance in Africa, 2003, Global Health Challenges for Human Security, eds. L. Chen, J. Leaning, & V. Narasimhan, p. 126 (HARVAF0513)]

Approximately 30 million people in Africa are living with HIV and AIDS. There are between four and five million new infections every year, and currently between two and three million people die every year from AIDS and related causes. Yet less than 0.2% OF Africans are currently on a prescribed course of anti-retroviral treatment. Even if one million people in Africa begin anti-retroviral treatment every year for the next five years, the number of people living with untreated HIV an AIDS in the comment will continue to rise. Moreover, the nature of the epidemic means that the worst is yet to come. The time lag between HIV infection and death from AIDS is estimated at about nine years in Africa (somewhat shorter than in Europe and North America). Given the recency of the HIV epidemic, notably in South Africa, the vast majority of AIDS mortality remains in the future. The level of deaths we are witnessing now reflects indicates a substantially higher number of deaths nine years hence. Figure 1 illustrates the dual nature of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. The direct impact of HIV—namely, the deaths of tens of millions of human beings from AIDS—is the greatest threat to human life in the coming century. We are only at the beginning of the global HIV/AIDS pandemic. To appreciate what this entails for human security, we must stretch our imaginations.

 

AIDS is the biggest killer in Sub-Saharan Africa

ROTHBERG, 07[Dr. Robert Rothberg, Harvard Medical School, AFRICA: PROGRESS & PROBLEMS -- AIDS & HEALTH ISSUES, 2007, p. 24]

The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), which causes AIDS, is the leading infectious diseases threat in the world today. While more than 25 million people have died from AIDS since the early 1980s, that number is expected to reach 45 million by 2010. The fourth-biggest killer in the world, HIV/AIDS is the leading cause of death in Sub-Saharan Africa.

 

55 million Africans are projected to die of AIDS by 2020

COOK, 06[Nicolas Cook, Congressional Research Service, AIDS IN AFRICA, May 5, 2006, http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/67156.pdf (PDAF0152)]

Based on aggregate estimates, about 27.5 million Africans have died of AIDS since 1982 at the start of the epidemic, including about 2.4 million or more in 2005. UNAIDS has projected that between 2000 and 2020, 55 million Africans will likely have lost their lives to AIDS, which has surpassed malaria as the leading cause of death in Africa and kills many times more people than Africa’s armed conflicts.

 

 

Millions in Sub-Saharan Africa have died of AIDS and will continue

GAMBARI, 01[Professor Ibrahim Gambari, UN Under-secretary-general on Africa, “The UN and Africa’s Development in the 21st Century, February 7, 2001, http://www.africacentre.org.uk/UNGambari.htm (HARVUN1222)]

When AIDS emerged over two decades ago, few people could predict the devastating impact that the disease would have. In 1991 estimates were that in Sub-Saharan Africa, by the end of the decade, 9 million people would be infected with the disease while 5 million would die. This prediction was proved wrong. Statistics show that the pandemic has killed 10 times more than in armed conflict on the continent. In 1999 alone, there were 6 million new infections worldwide, while the number of children orphaned by AIDS reached 13.2 million. Since the disease was discovered, over 24 million people have died with AIDS and AIDS related illnesses and ¾ of those were in the African continent. The report released by UNAIDS in June, 2000 tells us that there are about 25 million people in Sub-Saharan Africa living with AIDS and among those nearly 4 million are children. The prevalence rates among people between 25-49 years old exceeds 10% in 16 countries of the subcontinent. Africa is a home of the 70% of the infected adults and 80% of the infected children. AIDS has devastated many communities in Africa, rolled back decades of development and pushed stigmatised groups to the margins of the society.

 

IGNORING ANY FACET OF AIDS IN AFRICA IS = TO BEING COMPLICIT WITH MASS-MURDER –AIDS WILL KILL MORE PEOPLE IN AFRICA THAN ALL WARS COMBINED AND DEVASTATE THE ENTIRE CONTINENT

Brown, 06[(Lester, Former International Agricultural Analyst for U.S. Department of Agriculture and President of Worldwatch Institute, Earth Policy Institute, Plan B 2.0 – Rescuing A Planet Under Stress And A Civilization In Trouble, Chapter Six, http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/PB2/PB2ch6_ss3.htm)]

Although diseases such as malaria and cholera exact a heavy toll, there is no precedent for the number of lives affected by the HIV epidemic. To find anything similar to such a potentially devastating loss of life, we have to go back to the smallpox decimation of Native American communities in the sixteenth century or to the bubonic plague that took roughly a fourth of Europe’s population during the fourteenth century. HIV should be seen for what it is—an epidemic of epic proportions that, if not checked soon, could take more lives during this century than were claimed by all the wars of the last century. 17 Since the human immunodeficiency virus was identified in 1981, this infection has spread worldwide. By 1990, an estimated 10 million people were infected with the virus. By the end of 2004, the number who had been infected climbed to 78 million. Of this total, 38 million have died; 39 million are living with the virus. Twenty-five million HIV-positive people today live in sub-Saharan Africa, but only 500,000 or so are being treated with anti-retroviral drugs. Seven million live in South and Southeast Asia, with over 5 million of them in India alone. 18 Infection rates are climbing. In the absence of effective treatment, the parts of sub-Saharan Africa with the highest infection rates face a staggering loss of life. Adding the heavy mortality from the epidemic to the normal mortality of older adults means that countries like Botswana and Zimbabwe will lose half of their adult populations within a decade. 19 The HIV epidemic is not an isolated phenomenon. It is affecting every facet of life and every sector of the economy. Food production per person, already lagging in most countries in sub-Saharan Africa, is now falling fast as the number of field workers shrinks. As food production falls, hunger intensifies among the dependent groups of children and the elderly. The downward spiral in family welfare typically begins when the first adult falls victim to the illness—a development that is doubly disruptive because for each person who is sick and unable to work, another adult must care for that person. 20 The massive loss of young adults to AIDS is already beginning to cut into economic activity. Rising worker health insurance costs in industry are shrinking or even eliminating company profit margins, forcing some firms into the red. In addition, companies are facing increased sick leave, decreased productivity, and the burden of recruiting and training replacements when employees die. 21 Education is also affected. The ranks of teachers are being decimated by the virus. In 2001, for instance, Zambia lost 815 primary school teachers to AIDS, the equivalent of 45 percent of new teachers trained that year. With students, when one or both parents die, more children are forced to stay home simply because there is not enough money to buy books and to pay school fees. Universities are also feeling the effects. At the University of Durbin in South Africa, for example, 25 percent of the student body is HIV-positive. The effects on health care are equally devastating. In many hospitals in eastern and southern Africa, a majority of the beds are now occupied by AIDS victims, leaving less space for those with other illnesses. Already overworked doctors and nurses are often stretched to the breaking point. With health care systems now unable to provide even basic care, the toll of traditional disease is also rising. Life expectancy is dropping not only because of AIDS, but also because of the deterioration in health care. 23 The epidemic is leaving millions of orphans in its wake. Sub-Saharan Africa is expected to have 18.4 million “AIDS orphans” by 2010—children who have lost at least one parent to the disease. There is no precedent for millions of street children in Africa. The extended family, once capable of absorbing orphaned children, is now itself being decimated by the loss of adults, leaving children, often small ones, to take care of themselves. For some girls, the only option is what has come to be known as “survival sex.” Michael Grunwald of the Washington Post writes from Swaziland, “In the countryside, teenage Swazi girls are selling sex—and spreading HIV—for $5 an encounter, exactly what it costs to hire oxen for a day of plowing.” 24 The HIV epidemic in Africa is now a development problem, a matter of whether a society can continue to function as needed to support its people. It is a food security problem. It is a national security problem. It is an educational system problem. And it is a foreign investment problem. Stephen Lewis, the U.N. Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, says that the epidemic can be curbed and the infection trends can be reversed, but it will take help from the international community. The failure to fully fund the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, he says, is “mass murder” by complacency. 25 Writing in the New York Times, Alex de Waal, an adviser to the U.N. Economic Commission for Africa and to UNICEF, sums up the effects of the epidemic well:Just as HIV destroys the body’s immune system, the epidemic of HIV and AIDS has disabled the body politic. As a result of HIV, the worst hit African countries have undergone a social breakdown that is now reaching a new level: African societies’ capacity to resist famine is fast eroding. Hunger and disease have begun reinforcing each other. As daunting as the prospect is, we will have to fight them together, or we will succeed against neither.”

 

AIDS is on the march in Africa: each year two million Africans die from the disease and three million more become infected

Council on Foreign Relations Task Force on Africa Policy, 2006 [MORE THAN HUMANITARIANISM: A STRATEGIC APPROACH TOWARD AFRICA, 06, 63.]

There are no strong, credible signs that the pandemic's accelerated march is slowing. Each year, almost two million Africans die from AIDS, while over three million more become newly infected.

AIDS is ripping Sub-Saharan Africa apart—two thirds of the 30 million people with AIDS are in Sub-Saharan Africa:

Africa News, 2007[(June 19, 2007, Lexis, accessed June 20, 2007)]

Of the global total of 30 million persons living with HIV by 1997 some two-thirds (21 million) were in sub-Saharan Africa. Infection is concentrated in the socially and economically productive groups aged 15-45, with slightly more women infected than men. There are significant differences in the ages of infection for girls and boys with infection occurring at younger ages for girls (with girls and young women in some countries outnumbering boys and young men by factors of 5 or 6 in the age range 15-20). It is estimated that 12 million persons have died from HIV-related illnesses since the start of the epidemic worldwide, of whom approximately 9 million were Africans (UNICEF 2005). HIV/Aids continues to cut into the fabric of African households and societies. It is not uncommon to hear that a quarter to a third of the adult population in several African countries is HIV infected.

 

 

SINGER 2002]Peter, John M. Olin Post-doctoral Fellow, Foreign Policy Studies at the Brookings

Institution, Survival, Spring. This is not the bioethicistiactivist Peter Singer.)]

A recurring themes at all of these meetings was the new danger presented by the epidemic, not just in terms of direct victims of the disease itself, but also to international security. Speaking at the UN Security Council session, James Wolfensohn, the head of the World Bank, stated, “Many of us used to think of AIDS as a health issue. We were wrong. ..nothing we have seen is a greater challenge to the mace and stability of African societies than the epidemic of aids...we face a major development crisis, and more than that, a security crisis.”2 Peter Piot, chairman of the Joint UN Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), similarly noted that “Conflicts and AIDS are linked like evil twins.7 In fact, this connection made between the epidemic of AIDS and the danger of increased instability and war was also one of the few continuities between the way the Clinton and Bush administration foreign policy teams saw the world. Basing its assessment on a CIA report that discussed an increased prospects of “revolutionan wars,ethnic wars, genocide. and disruptive regime transitions” because of the disease, the Clinton Administration declared it a “national security threat” in 2000.4 While it was originally accused ofpandering to certain activist groups, by the time of Secretary Powell’s confirmation hearings the next year, the lead foreign policy voice of the new administration had also declared it a “national security problem.” He later affirmed that & presented “a clear and present danger to the world.”5 Similarly, US Under Secretary of State Paula Dobriansky stated that “HIV/AIDS is a threat to security and global stability, plain and simple”6 The looming security implications of AIDS, particularly within Africa, are thus now a baseline assumption of the disease’s danger. However, this threat has barely been fleshed out and the mechanisms by which experts claim that “AIDS has changed the landscape of war” are barely understood. 7 This article seeks to fill this space. AIDS not only threatens to heighten the risks of war, but also multiply its impact. The disease will hollow out military capabilities, as well as state capacities in general, weakening both to the point of failure and collapse. Moreover, at these times of increased vulnerability, the disease also creates new militant recruiting pools, who portend even greater violence, as well putting in jeopardy certain pillars of international stability. In isolation, this increased risk of war around the globe is bad enough. but there are also certain typesof cross-fertilization between the disease and conflict, intensifying the threat. The ultimate dynamic of warfare and AIDS is that their combination makes both more likely and more devastating. It is no overstatement that AIDS is “...the greatest disease challenge that humanity has faced in modem historv.”8 More people will die from the disease than any other disease outbreaks in human history, including the global influenza epidemic of 1918-9 and the Bubonic Plague in the 1300s million worldwide have already been killed and it is projected that at current rates, another 100 million more will he infected just by 2005.

 

POVERTY

Poverty in the developing world triggers ethnic conflict

Chua 03[Amy, law professor at Harvard, “World on Fire”, p. 195]

Is this wise? Almost by definition, in the developing world today the poor are far more numerous, poverty is far more extreme, and inequality far more glaring than in the Western countries, either today or at analogous historical periods. The ongoing population explosion outside the West only makes things worse. If current World Bank projections are correct, the population in countries now classified as developing is expected to increase from roughly four billion today to roughly eight bil-lion by the year 2050.' Meanwhile, the poor countries of the world lack the West's well-established rule of law traditions. As a result, political transitions in the developing world tend to be marked not by continuity and compromise, but rather by abrupt upheavals, military intervention, violence, and bloodshed. In other words, today's universal policy prescription for "under-development," shaped and promulgated to a large extent by the United States, essentially amounts to this. Take the rawest form of capitalism, slap it together with the rawest form of democracy, and export the two as a package deal to the poorest, most frustrated, most unstable, and most desperate countries of the world. Add market-dominant minorities to the picture, and the instability inherent in this bareknuckle version of free market democracy is compounded a thousandfold by the manipulable forces of ethnic hatred.

 

DIRTY WATER

3 million die every year from lack of access to water

Partners in Health, 2006. http://www.pih.org/issues/foodwaterhousing.html (acc)

Access to clean water is a basic human right and a prerequisite for improving the health of poor communities. Yet an estimated 1.1 billion people around the world, almost four times the population of the United States, do not have access to safe water. Almost all of them live in developing countries and two-thirds subsist on less than $2 per day.

The costs of lacking clean water to health and to economic and social development are incalculable. Diseases spread by unsafe water cause 3 million deaths a year. Young children are the most likely to suffer and die from these diseases. Diarrhea, primarily a disease of dirty water, is the biggest killer of children under five in poor countries, resulting in 4,000 preventable deaths each day, 1.8 million per year.

 

Non-access to clean water is like a preventable 9/11 everyday

Allgood, Greg. Ph.D., director of Procter & Gamble’s Children’s Safe Drinking Water program. “Tiny Water Purification Packet Helps Save Lives Worldwide.” Newsrise Science News. http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/518957/ March 21, 2006. CDI 07. MRC

Worldwide, approximately 1.5 million children under age five die each year from simple diarrhea acquired from pathogens found in drinking water, according to public health experts. That translates to about 4,000 children dying each day as a result of contaminated water. “It’s like a 9-11 catastrophe happening everyday worldwide, but this is a tragedy that can be prevented,” says Greg Allgood, Ph.D., director of Procter & Gamble’s Children’s Safe Drinking Water program, which manufactures the packets. The company has been developing the packets since 1995 in collaboration with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

 

 

Unsafe water kills more people than war or terrorism, hurts the economy, and prolongs poverty

HDR. Human Development Report is commissioned by the UN and produced by leading scholars. 2006. Chapter 1 “Ending the Crisis in Water and Sanitation.” http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/report.cfm#

At the start of the 21st centurythe violation of the human right to clean water and sanitation is destroying human potential on an epic scale. In today’s increasingly prosperous and interconnected world more children die for want of clean water and a toilet than from almost any other cause. Exclusion from clean water and basic sanitation destroys more lives than any war or terrorist act. It also reinforces the deep inequalities in life chances that divide countries and people within countries on the basis of wealth, gender and other markers for deprivation. Beyond the human waste and suffering, the global deficit in water and sanitation is undermining prosperity and retarding economic growth. Productivity losses linked to that deficit are blunting the efforts of millions of the world’s poorest people to work their way out of poverty and holding back whole countries. Whether viewed from the perspective of human rights, social justice or economic common sense, the damage inflicted by deprivation in water and sanitation is indefensible. Overcoming that deprivation is not just a moral imperative and the right thing to do. It is also the sensible thing to do because the waste of human potential associated with unsafe water and poor sanitation ultimately hurts everybody.

LACK OF CLEAN WATER DIRECTLY IMPEDES WOMEN’S RIGHTS

Obando ’03 (Ana Elena, “Women and Water Privatization” WHRnet, Nov. 2003, http://www.whrnet.org/docs/issue-water.html, accessed 6/26/07)

Water is a fundamental and inalienable human right and a common good that every person and institution of this planet should protect. This resource is, like air, a heritage of humanity and must be declared that way. Water is not merchandize and no person or institution should be allowed to get rich from the sale of it. It should not be privatized, marketed, exported or transferred to a few multinational companies, which today already control 90 percent of privatized water utilities. For the GATT, NAFTA and FTAA, water is a commodity, an investment, a simple service for commercial use and profit. Women are the most affected by this crisis. More than half of the 1.2 billion people who do not have access to water are women and girls. The IV World Women’s Conference of the United Nations in 1995 contains one chapter in its Action Plan about women and environment in which the right to water was incorporated, although it was not analyzed how the water shortage or contamination disproportionately affect women. However, later investigations, as the one sponsored by UNIFEM, have verified that “… in most developing countries women are responsible for water management at the domestic and community level. It was also estimated that women and girls use more than 8 hours a day traveling from 10 to 15 km. to transport between 20 and 15 liters of water in each trip”. Men, especially in rural areas, do not play the role of getting or carrying water. Their relation with water has more to do with agricultural work, and with the storage of water. This gender inequality has implications in women’s daily life, from a rights based perspective, since the carrying of water not only causes them physical disorders, but also makes it difficult for them to get involved in activities such as education, income generation, politics, leisure and recreation.

 

 

Here are some cards I had sitting in a few word documents and I thought what the heck, I'll post them. I really think there should be a water (other than war) impact section, I think I've provided enough cards for a start on I think.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see this card in any of the major camp files, even though I saw a lot of the Thompson evd.

 

SOUTH AFRICA IS KEY TO CHINA’S SPACE CAPABILITIES

THOMPSON in 2004 (drew is Assistant Director at the Freeman Chair in China Studies, Center for Strategic and International Studies [CSIS], The Jamestown Foundation “ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SOFT POWER: CHINA'S AFRICA STRATEGY” vol 4 issue 24 12/07/04 //ish)

China's soft power gambit can also be seen in its heavy investments in Africa's educational systems, both by sending teachers to Africa and providing scholarships to African students from across the continent to study in Chinese universities. Between the start of the educational exchanges in the mid-1950s and 2000, 5,582 African students had enrolled in Chinese universities. These students typically spend two years learning Chinese, then study technical subjects, particularly engineering disciplines. Currently, about half of African students are pursuing advanced degrees. This support for education improves China's image in many countries, builds grassroots support in local communities and a better understanding of China among the educated elite. But more than just increasing goodwill towards Beijing, these educational programs help to provide China with the kind of workforce it requires to expand its own high tech industries. As China's space program expands and matures, it is seeking to improve its space tracking capabilities in the southern hemisphere. China operates a space tracking station in Namibia, and utilizes South African ports of call to support space-tracking ships.

 

Now just add a space card from Sevvdog :)

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Chinese attempt to gain Taiwan would lead to nuclear war

Michael Chase, The Jamestown Foundation, Research analyst for Defense Group Inc., 1/2/07, http://jamestown.org/news_details.php?news_id=213

As for its nuclear forces, China views nuclear weapons as an important component of its great power status. Beijing also sees nuclear weapons as underwriting the stable external security environment that it views as key to its continuing economic development and emergence as a great power. At the same time, the possession of nuclear weapons are also considered a key deterrent against the nuclear superpowers and as a backstop against infringements on China’s vital national interests, a view that emerged in direct response to U.S. nuclear threats against China in the 1950s. In addition, Chinese strategists appear to view the modernization of China’s nuclear weapons and delivery systems as vital to supporting the attainment of China’s key national security objectives, such as unification with Taiwan or at least the prevention of de jure Taiwan independence.

China Taiwan nuclear war would escalate

Michael Chase, The Jamestown Foundation, Research analyst for Defense Group Inc., 1/2/07, http://jamestown.org/news_details.php?news_id=213

The Second Artillery Corps’ nuclear force modernization is focused on improving survivability to make China’s nuclear deterrence posture more credible, a task that has taken on increased urgency as a result of China’s concerns regarding U.S. nuclear preeminence, missile defense plans and conventional precision strike capabilities. China is moving toward a much more survivable and thus more credible strategic nuclear posture with the development of the road-mobile DF-31 and DF-31A ICBMs and the JL-2 SLBM. Indeed, as experts have highlighted, the introduction of road-mobile strategic missiles and SSBNs will allow China to achieve “a degree of credible minimal deterrence vis-à-vis the continental United States” [18]. The modernization of Chinese nuclear forces and the transition from silo-based to road-mobile nuclear missiles and SSBNs would thus enhance deterrence stability, though it would also introduce new C2 challenges for the Second Artillery [19]. Escalation control will remain a serious concern in the event of a high-intensity conventional conflict. Specifically, U.S. military planners and decision-makers would need to carefully manage a conventional war with China to avoid the risk of unintended escalation, which could lead to a nuclear conflict that would be incredibly devastating for both sides [20]. At the same time, however, Washington would likely also need to prevent Beijing from using nuclear threats to achieve its political objectives, given that Chinese analysts have suggested nuclear weapons might be used to deter—or at least limit—U.S. military intervention in a cross-Strait conflict. Successfully managing this dangerous balancing act requires an in depth understanding of Chinese views on nuclear signaling, crisis management and escalation control.

 

A surge of nationalism leads to China Taiwan war

Eric Teo Chu Cheow, The Jamestown Foundation, April 15, 2004

Others ironically questioned the value of Taiwanese democracy, when they saw the chaos and mayhem in Taipei and in major cities across Taiwan, with continuous agitation and 'sit-ins' in the country. A political analyst Niu Jun even wondered if democracy was suitable for Chinese society at all; he stated, "You pay a high price, and what you get in return is higher disintegration of the society in Taiwan". It was felt that the current Taiwanese democracy may have deviated from the people's ideal when the election stirred ethnic struggle and used a referendum to achieve personal political goals. But the majority of the calls made in China were still to "hold back Taiwanese independence" and win them over on the idea of peaceful reunification, whilst strengthening China's own ability to achieve reunification, even by force, should peaceful means fail. These reactions indicate a rising nationalism in China, as the elite (those who use the Net particularly) press for reunification and stress that Taiwan must never be allowed to separate from the Motherland. Secondly, this nationalism could also be traced to what some elite Chinese see as a failure of democracy to help achieve social peace in Taiwan, especially when "external forces agitate" and "split the island". More revealing was a telephone survey done in the days following the Taiwan election and stalemate. A Social Survey Institute poll of 1,263 Chinese in 12 cities had a sampling size of more than 2,000, it followed a first survey taken just before the election. 9 out of 10 Chinese polled stated that they were following the Taiwanese election closely; it had jumped from 79.1% before the polls to 93.2% after (+14%); those who were not bothered plunged from 20.9% to 1.7% (-19%). Besides the increase in interest in Taiwan, those who opposed Taiwan's independence grew from 88.4% to 97.4% (+9%) whereas those who would not oppose it fell from 5.6% to 1.7%. What came out of these findings was the growing sense of crisis over Taiwan. But significantly, the percentage of those calling for reunification by force dropped from 42.8% to 29.1%, whereas those who advocated peaceful reunification increased from 54.9% to 70.9%. Hence, despite the sense of crisis felt over Taiwan, cool heads still prevail regarding reunification. The results of this survey clearly demonstrate a sharper division of the two sides of the Straits, as nationalism gains ground in both China and Taiwan. Cross-Straits analyst Zhang Tongxin also highlighted the fact that the rejection of Chen's referendum meant that the Taiwanese people would not wish to see relations with China worsen. There was also a growing confidence amongst the Chinese for a peaceful reunification process despite the sharp divergence in opinion. Nevertheless, nearly 92% of all respondents agreed that China should exercise its sovereign rights to deal with chaos in Taiwan, whilst 4.6% opposed this move. Many reiterated the fact that the Taiwan problem was an "internal issue", one which Americans and Westerners should not meddle with. Chinese nationalism is therefore on the rise, as the Taiwan election debacle coalesced the Chinese on the Mainland amidst an upsurge of nationalism, national uncertainty (of a Taiwanese independence) and potential external interference (from the West), as has always been the case in Chinese history.

this ones more of an internal link card but w/e

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indo Pak nuke war escalates globally

Mohan Malik, Professor of Security Studies at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies, Honolulu, Hawaii., 3/22/2007, http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-99233026.html /Srikanthan

One Chinese national security analyst argues that "what worries China more is the possibility that it could be drawn into a conflict, not between Pakistan and India per se, but between Pakistan and the United States, with the latter using India as a surrogate." (48) With the top al Qaeda and Taliban leadership fleeing into Pakistan's Wild West and Pakistani-held Kashmir, Beijing knows full well that Pakistan is no longer the "frontline state" in the war on terrorism that it once was; it is, in fact, the battlefield in the war on terror. (49) Should the India-Pakistani conflict escalate into a nuclear one, neither the geopolitical nor the radioactive fallout will remain limited to South Asia. Indeed, the most worrisome scenario would be one where Pakistan is losing a conventional conflict and uses tactical nuclear weapons in a desperate effort to win or to salvage a face-saving defeat that would allow the regime to survive. (The risk-taking nature of the Pakistani military leadership suggests that such a scen ario cannot be completely ruled out.) Should India respond by launching strategic nuclear strikes resulting in the complete destruction of the Pakistani state, China would find it difficult to sit idly by.

 

 

 

 

Indo Pak nuke war escalates globally

S. Paul Kapur, The Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2005 –Lexis /Srikanthan

Contrary to the expectations of the stability/instability paradox, a very low likelihood of subnuclear Indo-Pakistani conflict escalating to the nuclear level has not facilitated ongoing violence in South Asia. Rather, South Asian violence has resulted from a strategic environment in which nuclear escalation is a serious possibility in the event that a limited Indo-Pakistani confrontation spirals into a full-scale conventional conflict. This environment has enabled Pakistan to launch limited conventional attacks against India, while insulating itself against the possibility of full-scale Indian conventional retaliation and attracting international attention to the Kashmir dispute. Thus a significant degree of instability at the strategic level, which Cold War logic predicts should discourage lower-level violence, has actually promoted tactical instability on the subcontinent. The fact that the stability/instability paradox has not facilitated recent conflict in South Asia indicates that Indo-Pakistani tactical and strategic stability are not mutually incompatible. Therefore policies seeking to achieve such dual stability in the region will not necessarily be futile or dangerous. Indeed, increased strategic stability on the subcontinent has aided Indian efforts to preserve the status quo and has coincided with a decline in Indo-Pakistani tensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terrorism leads to nuclear war

Nuclear Control Institute, July 10, 2007, http://www.nci.org/nuketerror.htm

There is now intense national and international attention to the risks of nuclear terrorism. The possibilities that al Qaeda might acquire the materials and the knowledge for building nuclear weapons or "dirty bombs" or might attack commercial nuclear-power facilities to trigger a nuclear meltdown, are of particular concern. The Nuclear Control Institute has been alerting the public and policymakers to these risks, seeking emergency measures to reduce the vulnerabilites, and monitoring and assessing the responses of industry, governments and international agencies.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nuclear war causes extinction

Nuclear Policy Research Institute, August 29, 2005, http://www.nuclearpolicy.org/index.cfm?page=weblog&subpage=link&bid=03D6C0CA-40CA-38FA-3A635902C7CF588

 

Even if MD achieves 100% effectiveness in destroying incoming missiles before they reach USA territory, this will not protect anyone against the foremost disadvantage of nuclear weapons - extinction of the human species. When the incoming nuke is detonated, it showers the planet with radioactivity that remains lethal for many centuries. The location of the explosion is irrelevant because the radioactivity is dispersed around the planet by inland waterways, ocean and wind currents. E.g., if Russia launches 1,000 nuke ICBMs at America (less than one fifth of its arsenal) and all are destroyed; the radioactivity from all of those missles would combine with radioactivity from a USA counter-offensive of nukes. This would probably trigger the nuclear winter anticipated by the scientific community.

Space weapons lead to extinction

Sierra Club, January 15, 1986, http://www.sierraclub.org/policy/conservation/nuc-weapons.asp

 

Because of the grave threat to Earth's environment from space-based weapons and because the Sierra Club believes that outer space should be preserved for peaceful cooperation, exploration, and scientific discovery, the Sierra Club opposes any development, testing, or deployment of space- based weaponry. Consequently, the Sierra Club: Opposes the unilateral pursuit of space-based weapons systems beyond basic research to keep current on what is and what is not feasible; Calls upon Congress to limit appropriations for the Strategic Defense Initiative accordingly; Opposes any abrogation of relevant arms control agreements; Calls upon the Soviet Union, the United States, and all other nations to expand the 1967 Outer Space Treaty and negotiate a mutually verifiable, multilateral ban on the production, testing, and deployment of weapons in space. The Sierra Club's position is based on the following considerations: The risk of nuclear war and nuclear winter with their potential for initiating mass extinction of life on Earth would be increased by the possible pre-emptive (first-strike) use of space-based weapons and by the likelihood that pursuing them would remove all current restraints to the arms race, such as the ABM Treaty of 1972, the SALT II limits, the Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, and the Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968. Radioactive and/or other debris from space based weapons testing and orbiting nuclear reactors used for weapons application may contaminate the extra-atmospheric space environment and damage life on Earth. Pursuing the Strategic Defense Initiative would drain financial resources and scientific talent badly needed for the solution of pressing environmental problems and other socially beneficial programs.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US China relations key to the survival of the dollar

Financial Times, Global News Wire, February 27, 2007 –Lexis

As we look to the future, however, China's reemergence on the global economic scene raises the possibility of role reversal. Will China's rising economic power and burgeoning monetary muscle lead to pressures on the dollar which might threaten its value and its role as the international reserve currency? If this were to occur, then it would likely lead to the US administration's urging the Chinese to support the value of the dollar and not to move out of holding dollar reserves. The future role of the US dollar as the world's key currency depends in no small part on China. But it is not China's reemergence as an economic power that points to the end of the dominance of the dollar. or do we see much possibility of any Asian currency unit being a challenger. More problematic for the future of the dollar as the undisputed international currency is that current tensions in the bilateral US-China economic relationship are likely to be enduring ones. China's foreign exchange regime is unlikely to change significantly over the medium term, defined as the next five to 10 years, and China's bilateral trade surplus with the US is also a medium term phenomenon. China's foreign exchange reserves are likely to continue at high levels. The US-China bilateral relationship is therefore critical in managing the tensions which arise as a result of the trade imbalances and reserve buildup. It is true that both the US and China have strong interests in preserving a stable international economic and monetary order. But managing this order is the challenge. It is not malevolence but rather policy miscalculations and market reactions which pose the greatest threat to the future value and role of the dollar. The emergence of China as an economic power does not, in itself, imply a reduced role in the medium to long term for the US dollar. Looking to historical experience as a reliable guide, the pound sterling continued to play a significant role in the international monetary system long after Britain's economic preeminence was lost. Even if simple extrapolation exercises are accurate and China overtakes the US as the world's largest economy by mid-century, the dollar is likely to continue for a significant time thereafter as the world's leading currency. There will be a threat to the dollar's dominance if current economic policies and imbalances are not properly managed. The current situation is one marked by China's having a large bilateral trade surplus with the US, a rapid buildup of official reserves already exceeding $1 trillion, and a slowly appreciating renminbi against the US dollar. Not surprisingly, this situation has caused considerable tension between the United States and China, with the US pressuring China to let the renminbi appreciate in an effort to reduce the bilateral trade deficit. The Schumer-Graham proposal for a 27.5 percent tariff on Chinese imports to offset the extent of China's alleged "currency manipulation" remains an option before the US Senate. Some change in the direction of greater exchange rate flexibility is likely, and indeed is already happening with the faster appreciation of the renminbi.

Negative American ideals would raise Chinese nationalism causing a Taiwanese attack

The Washington Quarterly, Winter 2006 – Lexis

Chinese people share a deeply rooted historical sense of injustice at the hands of foreign countries, as well as a "dream of a strong China" (qiangguomeng). For this reason, the nationalist card is particularly effective when China faces hostility and challenges from abroad. According to one former Chinese senior official, if Chinese people felt threatened by external forces, the solidarity among the Chinese would be strengthened, and nationalism would be a useful tool for the regime to justify its leadership role. n6 In fact, even though corruption and social as well as economic problems have undermined the CCP's legitimacy to an extent, many people side with the government when foreigners criticize it, believing that, no matter how corrupt the government is, foreigners have no right to make unwarranted remarks about China and its people. Many Chinese people are upset by U.S. pressure on issues such as human rights, intellectual property rights, trade deficits, weapons proliferation, and Taiwan because they believe that the United States has used these issues to demonize China in an effort to prevent it from achieving great-power status. Historically, nationalism has influenced Chinese foreign policy in different ways, with different strains of nationalists pursuing divergent paths to their common goal of returning China to a state of national greatness. Varying nationalist perspectives on foreign policy, each with a different view about the sources of national weakness and a distinctive approach to revitalizing China, have resulted. Nativism, antitraditionalism, and liberal nationalism are three strands with which the pragmatic nationalists in the current Chinese government must contend. Nativism traces the roots of weakness to the impact of imperialism on China's self-esteem as well as the subversion of indigenous Chinese virtues, such as Confucian ethics, and calls for a return to self-reliance and Chinese tradition. In terms of foreign policy implications, nativism is often linked with confrontational antiforeignism and xenophobia. Nativists are hypersensitive to perceived foreign insults and militant in their reaction to them. The most extreme examples of nativist antiforeignism in modern China occurred during the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, when the hostility toward foreign influence led to the murder of many foreigners, the destruction of stores carrying foreign books and other merchandise, and finally to the burning of the British legation in Beijing and the Cultural Revolution of the late 1960s, when Mao pursued a policy of autarchy, isolating China almost completely from the rest of the world. Nativism lost its momentum in the 1980s but has regained some ground among elites who have reacted militantly to the so-called Western hegemony and cultural colonialism since the 1990s. Nativism has also been kept alive among some political elites who have suspected a U.S. intention to prevent China from rising to its rightful place in the post-Cold War world.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A war between the Korea's would draw in the superpowers of the world and go nuclear

Schwartz & Derber (prof law @ Cardozo School of Law & Ph.D, prof of Sociology @ Boston College) 1990

[William A, & Charles The Nuclear Seduction Univ. California Press p.140-141]

 

Elsewhere in Asia, more than 40,000 U.S. troops, "reportedly armed with some 150 tactical nuclear weapons … sit between 480,000 North Korean and 360,000 South Korean soldiers dug in along the DMZ." The U.S. troops constitute "an American nuclear tripwire stretched across the Korean peninsula," where "a second war could likely trigger an American nuclear attack on North Korea." Nuclear-armed Soviet naval forces in the North Pacific watch while enormous political upheaval and government repression continue to rack South Korea even after its nominal transition to democracy. The entire Pacific region, in fact, has become such a vast and unstable arena of nuclear-armed "eyeball-to-eyeball" superpower confrontation that "it is as likely that World War III could begin in the Pacific as in Europe or the Middle East."

 

For while Cold War blocs have remained steady in Europe, they have shifted dramatically in the Pacific. Two major land wars and a host of bloody insurrections and heavily armed repressive governments have erupted in less than half a century. Communist, democratic, and nationalist insurgencies, as well as continuing conflicts between nations, will continue to make the region politically turbulent into the foreseeable future, heightening the possibility of superpower intervention. Should their interventions overlap, the superpowers could clash and escalate to nuclear war."[33]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Terrorism leads to nuclear war

Nuclear Control Institute, July 10, 2007, http://www.nci.org/nuketerror.htm

There is now intense national and international attention to the risks of nuclear terrorism. The possibilities that al Qaeda might acquire the materials and the knowledge for building nuclear weapons or "dirty bombs" or might attack commercial nuclear-power facilities to trigger a nuclear meltdown, are of particular concern. The Nuclear Control Institute has been alerting the public and policymakers to these risks, seeking emergency measures to reduce the vulnerabilites, and monitoring and assessing the responses of industry, governments and international agencies.

 

Beware power tagging in impacts. I don't think the card says what your tag says.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beware power tagging in impacts. I don't think the card says what your tag says.

at most the cards gives warrants as to why terrorist can/will get weapons...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Berube ’97 (David, Ph.D. in Communications, “Nanotechnological Prolongevity: The Down Side”, NanoTechnology Magazine, June/July 1997, p. 1-6, URL: http://www.cla.sc.edu/ENGL/faculty/berube/prolong.htm)

This means-ends dispute is at the core of Montagu and Matsou’s treatise on the dehumanization of humanity. They warn “its destructive toll is already greater than that of any war, plague, famine, or natural calamity on record – and its potential danger to the quality of life and the fabric of civilized society is beyond calculation. For that reason this sickness of the soul might well be called the Fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse… Behind the genocide of the Holocaust lay a dehumanized thought; beneath the menecide of deviants and dissidents… in the cuckoo’s next of America, lies a dehumanized image of man… (Montagu & Matsou, 1983, p. xi-xii). While it may never be possible to quantify the impacts dehumanizing ethics may have had on humanity, it is safe to conclude the foundations of humanness offer great opportunities which would be foregone. When we calculate the actual losses and the virtual benefits, we approach a nearly inestimable value greater than any tools which we can currently use to measure it. Dehumanization is nuclear war, environmental apocalypse, and international genocide. When people become things, they become dispensable. When people are dispensable, any and every atrocity can be justified. Once justified, they seem to be inevitable for every epoch has evil and dehumanization is evil’s most powerful weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if large fiery balls of doom aren’t bad enough, guess what?? The India/Pakistan war would cause systemic violence in the form of world wide starvation , massive outbreaks of diesease, armed conflicts , and would also destroy 40% of the world’s ozone layer!!

Edwards, writer for Newscience.com, 2007

[ Rob, http://technology.newscientist.com/channel/tech/nuclear/dn12728-regional-nuclear-war-could-trigger-mass-starvation.html , October]

A nuclear war between India and Pakistan could cause one billion people to starve to death around the world, and hundreds of millions more to die from disease and conflicts over food. That is the horrifying scenario being presented in London today by a US medical expert, Ira Helfand. A conference at the Royal Society of Medicine will also hear new evidence of the severe damage that such a war could inflict on the ozone layer. "A limited nuclear war taking place far away poses a threat that should concern everyone on the planet," Helfand told New Scientist. This was not scare mongering, he adds: "It is appropriate, given the data, to be frightened." Helfand is an emergency-room doctor in Northampton, Massachusetts, US, and a co-founder of the US anti-nuclear group, Physicians for Social Responsibility. In his study he attempted to map out the global consequences of India and Pakistan exploding 100 Hiroshima-sized nuclear warheads.

Global hoarding

 

Earlier studies have suggested that such a conflict would throw five million tonnes of black soot into the atmosphere, triggering a reduction of 1.25°C in the average temperature at the earth's surface for several years. As a result, the annual growing season in the world's most important grain-producing areas would shrink by between 10 and 20 days. Helfand points out that the world is ill-prepared to cope with such a disaster. "Global grain stocks stand at 49 days, lower than at any point in the past five decades," he says. "These stocks would not provide any significant reserve in the event of a sharp decline in production. We would see hoarding on a global scale." Countries which import more than half of their grain, such as Malaysia, South Korea and Taiwan, would be particularly vulnerable, Helfand argues. So, too, would 150 million people in north Africa, which imports 45% of its food. Many of the 800 million around the world who are already officially malnourished would also suffer. Large-scale impacts on food supplies from global cooling are credible because they have happened before, Helfand says. The eruption of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 produced the "year without a summer" in 1816, causing one of the worst famines of the 19th century.

Mass starvation

 

The global death toll from a nuclear war in Asia "could exceed one billion from starvation alone", Helfand concludes. Food shortages could also trigger epidemics of cholera, typhus and other diseases, as well as armed conflicts, which together could kill "hundreds of millions". Another study being unveiled at today's conference suggests that the smoke unleashed by 100, small, 15 kiloton nuclear warheads could destroy 30-40% of the world's ozone layer. This would kill off some food crops, according to the study's author, Brian Toon, an atmospheric scientist from the University of Colorado in Boulder, US. The smoke would warm the stratosphere by up to 50°C, accelerating the natural reactions that attack ozone, he says. "No-one has ever thought about this before," he adds, "I think there is a potential for mass starvation." Such dire predictions are not dismissed by nuclear experts, though they stress the large uncertainties involved. The fallout from a nuclear war between India and Pakistan "would be far more devastating for other countries than generally appreciated," says John Pike, director of the US think tank, globalsecurity.org. "Local events can have global consequences." Dan Plesch from the University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies, agrees that everyone is at risk from a limited nuclear war. "We live in a state of denial that our fate can be determined by decisions in Islamabad and New Delhi as much as in Washington and Moscow," he says.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kerpen had us all in his thoughts I suppose...

 

Kerpen ‘8 - Policy director for Americans for Prosperity and creator of cross-x.com, Phil, “From Panic to Depression?”, National Review, 10/28, article.nationalreview.com/?q=OWQ3ZGYzZTQyZGY4ZWFiZWUxNmYwZTJiNWVkMTIxMmU=

It’s important that we avoid all these policy errors — not just for the sake of our prosperity, but for our survival. The Great Depression, after all, didn’t end until the advent of World War II, the most destructive war in the history of the planet. In a world of nuclear and biological weapons and non-state terrorist organizations that breed on poverty and despair, another global economic breakdown of such extended duration would risk armed conflicts on an even greater scale.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OVERPOPULATION CAUSES GENOCIDAL WARS THAT DESTROY CULTURAL DIVERSITY THAT CAUSES EXTINCTION.

KODEL, M.D., family physician in private practice in Los Angeles, volunteer t for The Children's Nature Institute, 4

Gary S., World Future Society, Global Strategies Forum “Why Are We So Vulnerable?” http://www.wfs.org/kodel.htm

 

 

Overpopulation caused crowded living conditions with enhanced competition for scarce resources, which contributed to the development of a style of war unique to civilization: the destruction of human cultures causing reductions in human diversity - genocide - rendering humanity vulnerable to changes in man-made and earthly conditions leading to human extinction. In contrast, tribal warfare evolved as a way for tribes to preserve their cultural identities. By preventing tribes from overrunning each other, tribal warfare promotes human cultural diversity (the opposite effect of genocide), protects humanity from the risks of changing environmental conditions, and thus helps prevent human extinction.

 

 

 

(__) OVERPOPULATION CRUSHES BIODIVERSITY.

CATTON, Professor Emeritus at Washington State University, 1998

William R, Negative Population Growth, http://billtotten.blogspot.com/2005/03/malthus-more-relevant-than-ever.html

 

 

We have trebled the human load upon this planet in my lifetime by using the planet unsustainably and this has caused a new era of extinction. According to a recent survey, a majority of American biologists regard the mass extinction of plant and animal species now resulting from human domination of the earth as a grave threat to humans in the next century (Warrick, 1998). We live in a world losing biodiversity at an unprecedented rate (Koopowitz and Kaye, 1983; Wilson, 1992:215 ff; Tuxill, 1998). It is high time to see that this consequence was implicit in the 1798 essay by Malthus.

 

 

 

 

(__) OVERPOPULATION IS THE ROOT CAUSE OF GENOCIDE – RWANDA PROVES.

DIAMOND, American evolutionary biologist and physiologist, 5

Jared, “Malthus in Africa: Rwanda’s Genocide”, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, http://www.ditext.com/diamond/10.html

 

 

Instead, I conclude that population pressure was one of the important factors behind the Rwandan genocide, that Malthus's worst-case scenario [328] may sometimes be realized, and that Rwanda may be a distressing model of that scenario in operation. Severe problems of overpopulation, environmental impact, and climate change cannot persist indefinitely: sooner or later they are likely to resolve themselves, whether in the manner of Rwanda or in some other manner not of our devising, if we don't succeed in solving them by our own actions. In the case of Rwanda's collapse we can put faces and motives on the unpleasant solution; I would guess that similar motives were operating, without our being able to associate them with faces, in the collapses of Easter Island, Mangareva, and the Maya that I described in Part 2 of this book. Similar motives may operate again in the future, in some other countries that, like Rwanda, fail to solve their underlying problems. They may operate again in Rwanda itself, where population today is still increasing at 3% per year, women are giving birth to their first child at age 15, the average family has between five and eight children, and a visitor's sense is of being surrounded by a sea of children.

 

 

 

(__) OVERPOPULATION MAKES THE ELIMINATION OF POVERTY IMPOSSIBLE.

BROWN, president of the Earth Policy Institute, 6

Lester, Plan B 2.0, http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/PB2/PB2preface.htm

 

 

In the original Plan B, we had a budget for eradicating poverty, but if the economy’s environmental support systems are collapsing, poverty eradication will not be possible. If croplands are eroding and harvests are shrinking, if water tables are falling and wells are going dry, if rangelands are turning to desert and livestock are dying, if fisheries are collapsing, if forests are shrinking, and if rising temperatures are scorching crops, a poverty eradication program—no matter how carefully crafted and well implemented—will not succeed.

 

 

 

 

(__) ROOT CAUSE OF TERRORISM IS OVERPOPULATION – PRESIDENTIAL STUDY CONCLUDES.

CENTER FOR RESEARCH ON POPULATION AND SECURITY, 1

The Public Report of the Vice President's Task Force on Combatting Terrorism, http://www.population-security.org/issue_a.htm

 

 

Arguably the most authoritative work on terrorism was the February 1986 Report of the Vice President's Task Force on Combatting Terrorism, chaired by Vice President George Bush, Sr. Yet no mention of the study has appeared in the press since September 11, 2001. On that day, the George Bush Library archivist, Melissa Walker, pulled it from her files in anticipation of interest by the media. But not until October 29th did she receive her first request. It was from CRPS. This report concludes that the root cause of terrorism is overpopulation. This determination the Vatican no doubt finds highly offensive since all of the solutions to the population problem undermine papal authority. This report appears in its entirety.

(__) studies CONCLUDE decreasing population has a linear correlation with a decreased risk of ethnic war and terrorism.

CINCOTTA, ENGELMAN, AND, ANASTASION, Senior Research Associates for Population Action International, 3

Richard, Robert and Daniele, “The Security Demographic - Population and Civil Conflict After the Cold War.” Population Action International. http://www.populationaction.org/Publications/Fact_Sheets/FS23/Summary.shtml

 

Do the dynamics of human population — rates of growth, age structure, distribution and more — influence when and where warfare will next break out? The findings of this report suggest that the risks of civil conflict (deadly violence between governments and non-state insurgents, or between state factions within territorial boundaries) that are generated by demographic factors may be much more significant than generally recognized, and worthy of more serious consideration by national security policymakers and researchers. Its conclusions — drawn from a review of literature and analyses of data from 180 countries, about half of which experienced civil conflict at some time from 1970 through 2000argue that: During the last three decades of the 20th century, demographic transition — a population's shift from high to low rates of birth and death — was associated with continuous declines in the vulnerability of countries to civil conflicts (ethnic wars, antigovernment insurgencies and terrorism resulting in multiple deaths). This relationship suggests that a range of policies and programs that promote demographic transition by encouraging small, healthy and better educated families and longer lives will improve the prospects for political stability in developing countries and enhance global security in the future.

 

 

 

(__) OVERPOPULATION CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING – GREENHOUSE GASES ARE A PRODUCT OF HUMAN CONSUMPTION.

BASNSAL, CNSNEWS STAFF WRITER, 7

Monisha, Group Calls for Population Control to Stop Global Warming, http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200704/NAT20070418a.html

 

 

"Human population growth is the paramount environmental issue," Ric Oberlink, a spokesman for Californians for Population Stabilization, told Cybercast News Service. "Global warming is a very serious problem, but it is a subset of the overpopulation problem," he said. Oberlink argued that an increase in the emission of "greenhouse gases" -- carbon dioxide and other gases blamed for climate change -- is a result of human activity, "like most environmental problems." Although one part of the equation is what people do, he said, the other part is how many there are. "If we had half as many people, we wouldn't have much of a climatic warming problem," argued Oberlink.

 

(__) LARGE POPULATIONS AREN’T KEY TO WAR FIGHTING – TECH AND CONSCRIPTION SOLVE.

BINKIN, senior fellow in the Foreign Policy Studies program at the Brookings Institution, 1990

Manning the American Military: Demographics and National Security, NPG Forum Series, http://www.npg.org/forum_series/manning_military.htm

 

 

Such concerns, however, can be readily discounted. First, even before recent events in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, a replay of World War II between NATO and the Warsaw Pact that is, a protracted conventional conflict involving millions of troops was considered an extremely long shot. The betting among serious analysts was that any conventional military confrontation between the two sides would be measured in terms of days or weeks, rather than months or years, ending early either in negotiations or in escalation to nuclear conflict. In any case, few envisaged any situation that would require tens of millions of Americans to serve in the armed forces.

But even if, against all odds, the nation was to get involved in a protracted war of attrition that would require a substantial expansion in the size of the armed forces, full mobilization would be ordered, conscription would be reinstituted and some 18 million American men in the 18 through 26 year cohorts would provide the initial pool of draftees, followed as necessary by men in the older age groups and perhaps expanded opportunities for American women to serve or, indeed, be conscripted into military services. In the extreme, a U.S. military force equal to that of the second World War (11 million) would now constitute less than 5 percent of the total population compared with close to 10 percent in that conflict. In short, the current size of the American population is more than adequate to support "worst-case" scenarios, provided that the nation is willing to reinstitute conscription. And, as Figure 1 shows, even at the "lowest" projections by the Census Bureau, total population size would not be an issue in the foreseeable future. The population projected for 2080, for example, while substantially smaller than the current figure, would still be larger than the population that sustained our armed forces during the second World War.

Edited by AndrewC
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nanotech causes environmental damage

Davidson 05 (Keay, San Francisco Chronicle, 11/20/05, “Nanotechnology may hold risks, scientists war”,

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...NGREFB1S71.DTL

 

The U.S. government should spend more money investigating potential health and environmental hazards of nanotechnology, a leading environmental group says. New types of materials and chemicals that are invisibly small -- i.e., with diameters measured in nanometers, or billionths of a meter -- have many possible valuable uses in medicine, environmental cleanups, water treatment, energy production, technology and other areas, representatives of the Washington-based group Environmental Defense acknowledged at a news conference Wednesday. However, uncertainties linger over the possible harm of nanomaterials and nanoparticles on human health and the environment, they cautioned. For example, nanoparticles used as anti-tumor agents are so small that they might slip inside the human brain and perhaps damage it. Likewise, if leaked from a factory, the particles might destroy river bacteria, which lie at the base of much of the food chain. Because the toxic aspects of nanotechnology remain a frontier subject of research, "our traditional ways of thinking about hazardous materials are going to have to broaden a bit," said Dr. John Balbus, the organization's health program director. He and three colleagues wrote an article about the potential downsides of nanotechnology for a recent issue of the journal Issues in Science and Technology, a joint publication of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the University of Texas.

 

 

 

Nanotech causes disease- collapses the immune system

Erosion, Technology and Concentration Group, 2002. (“No Small Matter! Nanotech Particles Penetrate Living Cells and Accumulate in Animal Organs,” Issue 76. http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/Nanot...allmatter.html)

 

Again, what’s the big deal? The big deal is uncertainty, but scientists see two potential problems specific to these forms of carbon–one problem has to do with their shape and one, apparently, has to do with their size. It turns out that Dr. Wiesner’s comparison of carbon nanotubes with asbestos is not merely rhetorical, highlighting the need to assess the dangers of a material before it becomes ubiquitous. Carbon nanotubes resemble asbestos fibers in shape: they are long and needle-like. According to Dr. Wiesner, carbon nanotubes cannot pose much of a threat at present because, in our environment, they tend to clump together rather than exist as single fibers (which have the potential to cause serious respiratory problems as asbestos fibers have). However, an intensive area of research is to figure out a way to solubilize nanotubes–in effect, to de-clump them–so that they can be more easily used as single, detached fibers.23. Two patents on methods of solubilizing nanotubes in organic solutions have issued in the last year to the University of Kentucky (USA).24. Very few studies have been done to learn what might happen if nanotube fibers were breathed in or if they were used in drug delivery or disease diagnoses or as biosensors.25. Immunologist Silvana Fiorito has discovered in preliminary research that when a 1 micrometer-wide particle of pure carbon (in the form of graphite) is introduced into a cell, the cell responds by producing nitric oxide, which indicates that the immune system is working and the body is fighting back against an invading foreign substance.26. When a nano-sized particle of the same substance — pure carbon — is added to cells (in the form of either nanotubes or fullerenes), the cells fail to produce an immune response–they welcome the alien carbon like a long lost relative. The ability to slip past the immune system may be desirable for drug delivery, but what happens when uninvited nanoparticles come calling? In other words, once nanotechnologists have figured out how to distract the bouncer guarding the door, how can you be sure you’re still keeping out the riff-raff?

 

 

 

A Nano accident will end live throughout the universe

ETC 03 (Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration Atomtech: Technologies Converging at the Nano-scale January 2003) <http://www.etcgroup.org/documents/TheBigDown.pdf>

 

GRAY GOO What if nanobots start building chairs and don’t stop? The self-replicating and assembly processes could go haywire until the world is annihilated by nanobots or their products. Gray Goo refers to the obliteration of life that could result from the accidental and uncontrollable spread of selfreplicating assemblers. Drexler provides a vivid example of how quickly the damage could pile up beginning with one rogue replicator. “If the first replicator could assemble a copy of itself in one thousand seconds, the two replicators could then build two more in the next thousand seconds, the four build another four, and the eight build another eight. At the end of ten hours, there are not thirty-six new replicators, but over 68 billion. In less than a day, they would weigh a ton; in less than two days, they would outweigh the Earth; in another four hours, they would exceed the mass of the Sun and all the planets combined.

 

 

 

Unregulated nanotech sparks massive arms races, collapsing deterrence and making all scenarios for conflict more likely

Center For Responsible Nanotechnology, 2007(Results of Our Ongoing Research) <http://www.crnano.org/overview.htm>

 

Nanotech weapons would be extremely powerful and could lead to a dangerously unstable arms race. Molecular manufacturing raises the possibility of horrifically effective weapons. As an example, the smallest insect is about 200 microns; this creates a plausible size estimate for a nanotech-built antipersonnel weapon capable of seeking and injecting toxin into unprotected humans. The human lethal dose of botulism toxin is about 100 nanograms, or about 1/100 the volume of the weapon. As many as 50 billion toxin-carrying devices—theoretically enough to kill every human on earth—could be packed into a single suitcase. Guns of all sizes would be far more powerful, and their bullets could be self-guided. Aerospace hardware would be far lighter and higher performance; built with minimal or no metal, it would be much harder to spot on radar. Embedded computers would allow remote activation of any weapon, and more compact power handling would allow greatly improved robotics. These ideas barely scratch the surface of what's possible. An important question is whether nanotech weapons would be stabilizing or destabilizing. Nuclear weapons, for example, perhaps can be credited with preventing major wars since their invention. However, nanotech weapons are not very similar to nuclear weapons. Nuclear stability stems from at least four factors. The most obvious is the massive destructiveness of all-out nuclear war. All-out nanotech war is probably equivalent in the short term, but nuclear weapons also have a high long-term cost of use (fallout, contamination) that would be much lower with nanotech weapons. Nuclear weapons cause indiscriminate destruction; nanotech weapons could be targeted. Nuclear weapons require massive research effort and industrial development, which can be tracked far more easily than nanotech weapons development; nanotech weapons can be developed much more rapidly due to faster, cheaper prototyping. Finally, nuclear weapons cannot easily be delivered in advance of being used; the opposite is true of nanotech. Greater uncertainty of the capabilities of the adversary, less response time to an attack, and better targeted destruction of an enemy's visible resources during an attack all make nanotech arms races less stable. Also, unless nanotech is tightly controlled, the number of nanotech nations in the world could be much higher than the number of nuclear nations, increasing the chance of a regional conflict blowing up.

 

 

 

Unregulated nanotech causes extinction-arms race

CRN 04 (Center for Responsible Nanotechnology, “Disaster Scenarios”, 7-19-04, http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2004/07/disaster_scenar.html)

Highly plausible. A nano arms race appears almost inevitable, and would probably be unstable as discussed in the military capabilities study (#20). A nano-enabled war would probably be lethal to many civilians. As pointed out by Tom McCarthy, "Military planners will seek a target that is large enough to find and hit, and that cannot be easily replaced. The natural choice, given the circumstances, will be civilian populations." Both full-scale war and unconventional/terroristic war will target civilians, who will be nearly impossible to defend without major lifestyle changes. It would be easy to deploy enough antipersonnel weapons to make the earth unsurvivable by unprotected humans.

 

 

 

Unregulated unilateral nanotech leads to major wars through deterrence break downs

Gubrud 97 (Mark Avrum, 19. Superconductivity Researcher at U of MD “Nanotechnology and International Security.” Foresight 5th Conference Paper. http://www.csr.umd.edu/~mgubrud/nanosec1.html )

 

Whereas the perfection of nuclear explosives established a strategic stalemate, advanced molecular manufacturing based on self-replicating systems, or any military production system fully automated by advanced artificial intelligence, would lead to instability in a confrontation between rough equals. Rivals would feel pressured to preempt, if possible, in initiating a full-scale military buildup, and certainly not to be caught behind. As the rearmament reached high levels, close contactbetween forces at sea and in space would give an advantage to the first to strike.

The greatest danger coincides with the emergence of these powerful technologies: A quickening succession of "revolutions" may spark a new arms race involving a number of potential competitors. Older systems, including nuclear weapons, would become vulnerable to novel forms of attack or neutralization. Rapidly evolving, untested, secret, and even "virtual" arsenals would undermine confidence in the ability to retaliate or resist aggression. Warning and decision times would shrink. Covert infiltration of intelligence and sabotage devices would blur the distinction between confrontation and war. Overt deployment of ultramodern weapons, perhaps on a massive scale, would alarm technological laggards. Actual and perceived power balances would shift dramatically and abruptly. Accompanied by economic upheaval, general uncertainty and disputes over the future of major resources and of humanity itself, such a runaway crisis would likely erupt into large-scale rearmament and warfare well before another technological plateau was reached.

 

 

 

And these wars would cause existential risks

Treder and Phoenix 7 (Mike , Executive Director of CRN, BS Biology, University of Washington, Research Fellow with the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, a consultant to the Millennium Project of the American Council for the United Nations University AND Chris Phoenix, CRN’s Director of Research, has studied nanotechnology for more than 15 years. BS, Symbolic Systems, MS, Computer Science, Stanford University. Center For Responsible Nanotechnology, Results of Our Ongoing Research, Last Updated April 16, 2007. http://www.crnano.org/overview.htm)

 

Consider, for instance, this excerpt from the CRN dangers page: Molecular manufacturing raises the possibility of horrifically effective weapons. As an example, the smallest insect is about 200 microns; this creates a plausible size estimate for a nanotech-built antipersonnel weapon capable of seeking and injecting toxin into unprotected humans. The human lethal dose of botulism toxin is about 100 nanograms, or about 1/100 the volume of the weapon. As many as 50 billion toxin-carrying devices—theoretically enough to kill every human on earth—could be packed into a single suitcase.

Edited by AndrewC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone help me find impacts of landfills/waste (link says poor people produce lower amounts of waste).

 

A card talking about how landfills/waste kills biodiversity could also be used (since biodiversity bad cards are plentiful).

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can someone help me find impacts of landfills/waste (link says poor people produce lower amounts of waste).

 

A card talking about how landfills/waste kills biodiversity could also be used (since biodiversity bad cards are plentiful).

 

Wikipedia says:

"Many different types of waste have negative impacts upon the wider environment.

Waste pollution is considered a serious threat by many and can broadly be defined as any pollution associated with waste and waste management practices. Typical materials that are found in household waste, and which have specific environmental impacts, include biodegradable wastes, batteries, aerosols, oils, acids and fluorescent tubes.

Biodegradable waste is of specific concern because it breaks down in landfills to form methane, a potent greenhouse gas. If this gas is not prevented from entering the atmosphere, by implication, it contributes to climate change.

Littering can be considered the most visible form of solid waste pollution. The act of littering for the most part constitutes disposing of waste inappropriately, typically in public places. Littering itself may or may not be an intentional action, but is still an environmental crime in most government jurisdictions, with punitive consequences if cited by authorities.

Marine debris, also known as marine litter, is human-created waste that has been deliberately dumped, or accidentally become afloat, in a lake, sea, ocean or waterway. Though it was originally assumed that most oceanic marine waste stemmed directly from ocean dumping, it is now thought that around four fifths of the oceanic debris is from rubbish blown seaward from landfills, and washed seaward by storm drains.

Other forms of pollution associated with waste materials include illegal dumping and leaching. Illegal dumping or flytipping often involves unregulated disposal of materials on private or public land. Remote sites with road access, coupled with limited surveillance, often provides the perfect opportunity for this form of dumping, which often goes unpunished and leaves others (such as the community or developer) to properly dispose of the waste. Leaching is the process by which contaminants from solid waste enter soil and often ground water systems, contaminating them."

 

The terms and sources used in the article should help you find more warranted evidence. . .

 

Not to imply that the idea is COMPLETELY IDIOTIC or anything, but:

1. Non-unique

a) World population and waste production have been increasing exponentially since, what, the time of the Bubonic Plague?

B) The majority of people are currently NOT living in poverty

c) Industrial waste outweighs residential waste

 

2. Turn -- Although they consume more, affluent people are more likely to go out of their way to recycle.

 

3. Self-impact turn? -- I don't think you meant "biodiversity bad" as an impact. . . unless you wanted to turn your own disadvantage (I'm guessing you were thinking something like: solving poverty -> more waste -> biodiversity loss -> impact. Insert biodiversity bad as the impact and the argument becomes another advantage to solving poverty; insert biodiversity good and the argument becomes a disadvantage).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can someone help me find impacts of landfills/waste (link says poor people produce lower amounts of waste).

 

A card talking about how landfills/waste kills biodiversity could also be used (since biodiversity bad cards are plentiful).

 

 

type "landfill waste biodiversity" into google. this isn't the type of argument where you need access to lexis nexis or have to check out 20 books.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can someone help me find impacts of landfills/waste (link says poor people produce lower amounts of waste).

 

A card talking about how landfills/waste kills biodiversity could also be used (since biodiversity bad cards are plentiful).

 

i think the better, more warranted argument is to say 'landfills => global warming'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...