ABC News-->US Military: Global Warming Helps Taliban

[Pattonias]

Apparently terrorism is our fault due to our greenhouse gas emissions. We have been supporting it for years.

This is probably one of the most far reaching news stories I have ever seen. Listen for yourself. I can't believe that they are trying to tie all this together.

http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=8827529

[russ_watters]

The implication that natural disasters breed instability is logically sound, but the problem is how to actually quantify the effect. As important is how we respond to the crises. They used Somalia as an example. In Somalia, we, the world community, effectively subsidized the warlords by delivering food to them, from which they gained money and power. So is the current situation in Somalia due to the weather or is it due to the mismanagement of the aid by the UN? Heck, if the UN had ignored Somalia instead of trying to help, would Somalia be better off today?

[Proton Soup]

why can't we go back to the old days when the only emotional manipulation for environmental issues was a crying native american ?

[lisab]

why can't we go back to the old days when the only emotional manipulation for environmental issues was a crying native american ?

OK...that actually made me laugh.

[Pattonias]

The implication that natural disasters breed instability is logically sound, but the problem is how to actually quantify the effect. As important is how we respond to the crises. They used Somalia as an example. In Somalia, we, the world community, effectively subsidized the warlords by delivering food to them, from which they gained money and power. So is the current situation in Somalia due to the weather or is it due to the mismanagement of the aid by the UN? Heck, if the UN had ignored Somalia instead of trying to help, would Somalia be better off today?

At least in the Somalian example you can see a plain connection. You are saying that our indiscriminate distribution of food was manipulated by the warlords we were opposed to.
You are not trying to say that we are somehow responsible for Somalia being (on the edge of) a desert. There are so many other factors that contribute to the rise of terrorism that to try and say that "Global Warming" is a major factor is ludicrous. If we were to suddenly stop the global warming I seriously doubt the suicide bombers will stop. This kind of article is the kind of thing that makes global warming hard to swallow for many people. When you make these biased claims that can't be useful for anything but political claims.
It draws away from the real science behind the issue. You could say that global warming doesn't help prevent terrorism, but to say it is a major cause is a stretch.

On another note, the claim the the US Army believes this is ludicrous. They interviewed a retired general who didn't even make the claim. It is pretty obvious that the reporter wanted him to, but he never flat out said it.

[mheslep]

Silly. A retired General, another reporter, and an aid worker in Afghanistan are the experts? Despite the title, they don't even suggest how global warming is helping the Taliban now, but do some hand waiving about the future and glacial run off. Never mind making connection between the Himalayan glaciers and global warming (http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/05/05/himalayas-glaciers.html), or that any thing can be done about it in a relative time frame.

[Galteeth]

The implication that natural disasters breed instability is logically sound, but the problem is how to actually quantify the effect. As important is how we respond to the crises. They used Somalia as an example. In Somalia, we, the world community, effectively subsidized the warlords by delivering food to them, from which they gained money and power. So is the current situation in Somalia due to the weather or is it due to the mismanagement of the aid by the UN? Heck, if the UN had ignored Somalia instead of trying to help, would Somalia be better off today?

Some do make this case, that humanitarian intervention in Africa has actually had a negative net effect by helping to prop up the dysfunctional and brutal governments (amongst other things.)

[Skyhunter]

Silly. A retired General, another reporter, and an aid worker in Afghanistan are the experts? Despite the title, they don't even suggest how global warming is helping the Taliban now, but do some hand waiving about the future and glacial run off. Never mind making connection between the Himalayan glaciers and global warming (http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/05/05/himalayas-glaciers.html), or that any thing can be done about it in a relative time frame.

From the link above:

But it's not likely to last.

"As temperatures continue increasing, they will overtake additional mass provided by snow," Fountain said. "The freezing level will keep rising, and glaciers will melt."

It is only the western glaciers and is a result of climate change that is temporary.

The US military sees climate change as one of the top threats to US security.

http://securityandclimate.cna.org/report/National%20Security%20and%20the%20Threat%20of%20Cl imate%20Change.pdf

Anytime their is destabilization there is opportunity for groups like the Taliban to consolidate power.

[mheslep]

...It is only the western glaciers and is a result of climate change that is temporary.Yes only the western, which happen to be the largest glaciers in the world. How do you know the climate change causing western glacial advance is temporary?
The US military sees climate change as one of the top threats to US security.Yes the US military commissioned some reports. I think you would have a tough time justifying the adjective 'top'. The CNA report is by a group of retired officers writing for a think tank, not the 'US military'.
Anytime their is destabilization there is opportunity for groups like the Taliban to consolidate power.Well I'd say any time there are destabilizing events, then insurgent groups can further the destabilization, though it is not clear that the same groups will be able to then consolidate power. Still point taken. My point is that ABC News did not title the piece 'Climate change may aid groups like the Taliban in 20/50/100 years'. They specified the Taliban in the present tense, and the assertion that Global Warming is aiding them today, or even in the likely time frame of this particular conflict, is absurd.

[Skyhunter]

Yes only the western, which happen to be the largest glaciers in the world. How do you know the climate change causing western glacial advance is temporary?

That is what your link says. The reason being that as the planet warms, the frost line moves to higher elevations.

Yes the US military commissioned some reports. I think you would have a tough time justifying the adjective 'top'. The CNA report is by a group of retired officers writing for a think tank, not the 'US military'.


Terrorism, nuclear proliferation, rogue states, and climate change are the top threats to US security.

Well I'd say any time there are destabilizing events, then insurgent groups can further the destabilization, though it is not clear that the same groups will be able to then consolidate power. Still point taken. My point is that ABC News did not title the piece 'Climate change may aid groups like the Taliban in 20/50/100 years'. They specified the Taliban in the present tense, and the assertion that Global Warming is aiding them today, or even in the likely time frame of this particular conflict, is absurd.

I agree that the title doe not accurately reflect the content.

[Pattonias]

It should be noted that the US military has people that try and think out every possible scenario that could result in harm to our country. These reports are probably generated on a regular basis. The purpose is to have a plan should we end up in the worst case scenario. I wouldn't say that this means that the Army has taken to placing blame on anyone in particular for the source of global warming.

[Skyhunter]

It should be noted that the US military has people that try and think out every possible scenario that could result in harm to our country. These reports are probably generated on a regular basis. The purpose is to have a plan should we end up in the worst case scenario. I wouldn't say that this means that the Army has taken to placing blame on anyone in particular for the source of global warming.

The US military is not interested in blaming someone for global warming. They are simply drawing up contingencies for the inevitable. They are not paying attention to the deniers permeating the internet, fringe media, and FOX news/commentators. They are responding to the empirical science and the various possible scenarios that will stem from the physical response of the biosphere to the gross disruption of the carbon cycle as humans release long sequestered carbon into the atmosphere at unprecedented rates.

[TheStatutoryApe]

They are responding to the empirical science and the various possible scenarios that will stem from the physical response of the biosphere to the gross disruption of the carbon cycle as humans release long sequestered carbon into the atmosphere at unprecedented rates.

Neither are the military interested in empirical evidence of scientific claims. They are more interested in potential events than in the science of global warming. The potential for major and catastrophic events related to climate exists regardless of global warming and the military will need to respond either way. The reason for the events is immaterial to them unless of course there really are Russian weather control satellites.

[Skyhunter]

Neither are the military interested in empirical evidence of scientific claims. They are more interested in potential events than in the science of global warming. The potential for major and catastrophic events related to climate exists regardless of global warming and the military will need to respond either way. The reason for the events is immaterial to them unless of course there really are Russian weather control satellites.

Actually they are quite interested in the science. They need a basis for risk assessment.

[TheStatutoryApe]

Actually they are quite interested in the science. They need a basis for risk assessment.

They may take scientist predictions as an authority on the likelihood of major disasters and plan accordingly. Insurance companies also must weigh risks and likely take climate predictions into account. This does not mean that either group has any interest in the actual science. A potential risk is a potential risk even if it never comes to pass.

[Skyhunter]

They may take scientist predictions as an authority on the likelihood of major disasters and plan accordingly. Insurance companies also must weigh risks and likely take climate predictions into account. This does not mean that either group has any interest in the actual science. A potential risk is a potential risk even if it never comes to pass.

I agree, that they are not particularly interested in the science for the sake of science. I am not sure how I gave that impression.

[Pattonias]

I think the point that I was trying to make was that the military creating a risk assessment or contingency plan in regards to global warming does not constitute military support of the science behind global warming. I think it is more of a "if this happens then this is what we'll do" sort of thing.