Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Global warming impact like "nuclear war": report
Reuters ^ | September 12, 2007 | Jeremy Lovell

Posted on 09/12/2007 7:36:42 AM PDT by presidio9

Climate change could have global security implications on a par with nuclear war unless urgent action is taken, a report said on Wednesday.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) security think-tank said global warming would hit crop yields and water availability everywhere, causing great human suffering and leading to regional strife.

While everyone had now started to recognize the threat posed by climate change, no one was taking effective leadership to tackle it and no one could tell precisely when and where it would hit hardest, it added.

"The most recent international moves towards combating global warming represent a recognition ... that if the emission of greenhouse gases ... is allowed to continue unchecked, the effects will be catastrophic -- on the level of nuclear war," the IISS report said.

"Even if the international community succeeds in adopting comprehensive and effective measures to mitigate climate change, there will still be unavoidable impacts from global warming on the environment, economies and human security," it added.

Scientists say global average temperatures will rise by between 1.8 and 4.0 degrees Celsius this century due to burning fossil fuels for power and transport.

The IISS report said the effects would cause a host of problems including rising sea levels, forced migration, freak storms, droughts, floods, extinctions, wildfires, disease epidemics, crop failures and famines.

The impact was already being felt -- particularly in conflicts in Kenya and Sudan -- and more was expected in places from Asia to Latin America as dwindling resources led to competition between haves and have nots.

"We can all see that climate change is a threat to global security, and you can judge some of the more obvious causes and areas," said IISS transnational threat specialist Nigel Inkster. "What is much harder to do is see how to cope with them."

The report, an annual survey of the impact of world events on global security, said conflicts and state collapses due to climate change would reduce the world's ability to tackle the causes and to reduce the effects of global warming.

State failures would increase the gap between rich and poor and heighten racial and ethnic tensions which in turn would produce fertile breeding grounds for more conflict.

Urban areas would not be exempt from the fallout as falling crop yields due to reduced water and rising temperatures would push food prices higher, IISS said.

Overall, it said 65 countries were likely to lose over 15 percent of their agricultural output by 2100 at a time when the world's population was expected to head from six billion now to nine billion people.

"Fundamental environmental issues of food, water and energy security ultimately lie behind many present security concerns, and climate change will magnify all three," it added.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: agw; bushsfault; globalwarming; whateverwesayitmeans
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

1 posted on 09/12/2007 7:36:46 AM PDT by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I see...

Global warming equals nuclear winter.


2 posted on 09/12/2007 7:37:54 AM PDT by null and void (<---- Awake and filled with a terrible resolve...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

F.U.D., BS!


3 posted on 09/12/2007 7:37:59 AM PDT by gathersnomoss (If General Patton was alive, he would slap many faces!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Just read something in the book “The Privileged Planet” -

this period that we’re in is a geological anomaly. For most of the earth’s existance, it has been in a huge ice age. “Greenhouse gases” are what keeps it from sliding back into this “normal” condition.


4 posted on 09/12/2007 7:38:50 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Hysterical liberals. Repeat after me: WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

5 posted on 09/12/2007 7:39:04 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void
Women, children, and minorities hit hardest!
6 posted on 09/12/2007 7:39:15 AM PDT by chaos_5 (The Democrats are Communists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: null and void

I don’t don’t think its fair for you to make that analogy. I’m pretty sure that the author meant to say “Climate Change.” He just forgot, that’s all.


7 posted on 09/12/2007 7:40:12 AM PDT by presidio9 (Islam is as Islam does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Gore’s follow-up film will be sure to feature mushroom clouds now.


8 posted on 09/12/2007 7:41:23 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Truth : Liberals :: Kryptonite : Superman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

How is it that these Socialists want change so much, and Hillary!08 has adopted Change as her main campaign plank, yet they fear change in something that is always changing. Also, they want to stop evolution now, except for their own genetics experiments and engineered crops and animals.


9 posted on 09/12/2007 7:43:08 AM PDT by RightWhale (Stop Change while it is perfect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Remember when the Leftists came up with the term “Nuclear Psychic Numbing” to explain why people weren’t terrified 24/7 by the prospect of nuclear war?

The idea that we accepted it as an unlikely outcome was just beyond them. They just knew that Crazy Cowboy Reagan was going to force the Soviets to nuke us.

Poor fools were heartbroken when his actions helped speed the collapse of the Soviet Union.

10 posted on 09/12/2007 7:43:14 AM PDT by FormerLib (Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Much as I hate the heat I know that its easier for humans to surive in a hot climate than a frigid one. I’d rather have higher seas and more storms than glaciars crushing my house or having only regions at the equater warm enough to grow food.


11 posted on 09/12/2007 7:43:38 AM PDT by utherdoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
Poor fools were heartbroken when his actions helped speed the collapse of the Soviet Union.

They still deny that Reagan had anything to do with the collapse.

12 posted on 09/12/2007 7:45:30 AM PDT by null and void (<---- Awake and filled with a terrible resolve...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Climate change could have global security implications on a par with nuclear war unless urgent action is taken, a report said on Wednesday.

The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) security think-tank said global warming would hit crop yields and water availability everywhere, causing great human suffering and leading to regional strife.


A concatenation of ifs designed and arranged in such a way as to make the continued existence of the body making the report indispensable.
13 posted on 09/12/2007 7:45:48 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

In actuality, we’ve already had a nuclear war. WWII was ended with a nuclear attack on Japan. Other than the deaths due to the direct results of the nuclear explosions, there were minimal long term after effects. The US was certainly not influenced, to the least. If Global Warming will be so bad, bring it on.


14 posted on 09/12/2007 7:47:17 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Planting trees to offset carbon emissions is like drinking water to offset rising ocean levels)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Hysterical liberals. Repeat after me: WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!

From the IISS (source of the study) website: The IISS is the primary source of accurate, objective information on international strategic issues for politicians and diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business, economists, the military, defence commentators, journalists, academics and the informed public. The Institute owes no allegiance to any government, or to any political or other organisation.

There. How can you express doubts about the conclusion of the world's most accurate, objective organization?

15 posted on 09/12/2007 7:51:37 AM PDT by Homer_J_Simpson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: presidio9

As more and more people realize the hoax, the global warming hype has gone critical. Like the nuclear weapon this article references, the global warming hoax is in the process of being consumed by its own hysterical fire.


17 posted on 09/12/2007 7:52:00 AM PDT by poindexters brother
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Yawn.

They are really drama queens aren’t they?? LOL

I think the more extreme and dire their warnings is just evidene of pure desperation now, they have failed in their propaganda campaign, and are getting very shrill now.

Expect even more outrageous stuff like this.

But to the average person, it is looking sillier every day, like a bad Hollywood disaster movie.


18 posted on 09/12/2007 7:54:05 AM PDT by Names Ash Housewares
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Appreciated.


19 posted on 09/12/2007 7:58:48 AM PDT by cogitator (Welcome to my world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

If I am in favor of global warming, does this mean I should favor nuclear war?


20 posted on 09/12/2007 8:10:50 AM PDT by Starrgaizr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson