Yeah! but we should use steam powered nuclear weapons so we can keeps all the enviroments for ourselves!
Yeah! but we should use steam powered nuclear weapons so we can keeps all the enviroments for ourselves!
I doubt anyone would ever go to war to protect the environment. But countries can and will go to war to protect their own environments. For example there is talk at the moment of Ethiopia building a damn on the Nile river, and the Egyptians are very concerned about the environmental impact for their country
It is also quite plausible that wars will be fought because of the knock-on effects resultant from damaged environments. Eg a country may lose its source of fresh water or even any ability to produce food because of environmental damage. This may lead to it attacking another country in order to gain access to the food and water its people need in order to survive.
Last edited by Raelbo; 2013-06-12 at 02:43 PM.
If the environment in said country/region was so toxic that humanity as a whole was at risk of extinction, then yes war would need to happen and absolutely be justified.
I do not see any reason to include the rest of the world in my death, going to war against a major, nuclear armed power is just a way to commit suicide en masse. I will take my chances with changing weather or even try to get into a shelter, rather then go to certain death.
What? Where the hell do you people come up with these shitty stupid questions? So your suggestion is if we feel pollution from one nation is so bad it warrants going to war over? No, this is just a stupid question in the first place.
Not only justified, but overdue...
it is already too late. I feel pity for those that got children. Well wait, i feel pity for the children not for the people that got them in this situation.
If it was a shelter, you would live down there waiting to die. If they made "spaceships", there wouldn't be room for anyone other than "the powerfull". By doing nothing, you roll over and will die because the president can survive. If you atleast try and "win", you may die trying to save billions of lifes, or survive and live a long life.
The president/power figures are killing the planet and don't want to stop, even though it will end with the planet dieing. And you want to save them and do nothing?
“The worst thing I can be is the same as everybody else. I hate that.”
The behaviour you are describing is deeply illogical and as such extremely unlikely, not even the most corrupt politician would want to live the rest of a life in a shelter.
A war with a nuclear power has three likely outcomes:
a) The power winning and going on
b) Stalemate and status quo
c) Power loosing on conventional field which means it will unleash its NBC weaponry.
None of these outcomes is positive or something worth dying for. IT should be noted that in the case of c), that those killed by nuclear blasts will be the lucky ones.